PRINCETON,    N.    J. 


% 


Shelf 


Division. 
Section  . 
JVumder., 


.D.a,z.> 


LIBER    LIBRORUM. 


tibtx    Cibrorum: 


ITS 


STRUCTURE,  LIMITATIONS,  AND  PURPOSE. 


FRIENDLY   COMMUNICATION 


TO 


A    RELUCTANT    SCEPTIC 


NEW  YORK: 
CHARLES     SCRIBNER     &     CO. 

1867, 


CONTENTS 


Preface  to  the  American  Edition 
Preface        .... 
citAP.  Introductory  Correspondence 
I.     Revelation  and  Inspiration 
11.    The  Extent  of  the  Claim 
III.    The  Yerifvino  Faculty     . 
lY.    Many  Authors,  but  one  Book 
Y.    Jewish  History  and  Prophecy 
YT.    The  New  Testajient 
YII.     The  Canon  .... 
YIII.    Difficulties  in  the  Bible 
IX.     Interpretation  of  Scripture 
X.    The  Modern  Pharisee 
XL    A  Postscript 


PAGK 

7 

11 

15 

49 

58 

7G 

91 

104 

114 

128 

142 

172 

185 

198 


NOTES. 


A.  Eminent  Witnesses 

B.  Biblical  Interpretation 

C.  National  Establishments 

D.  Church  Authority 

E.  Idolatry  op  the  Bible 


211 

214 
217 
224 
230 


PREFACE  TO  THE  AMERICAN   EDITION. 


The- author  of  Liber  Librorum  firmly  believes  and 
earnestly  defends  the  Historic  Keality  and  the  Super- 
natural Origin  of  the  Mosaic  and  Christian  systems. 
He  also  accepts  the  Incarnation,  the  Resurrection, 
and  the  Redemptive  work  of  Christ,  and  the  other 
important  truths  which  these  involve.  In  respect  to 
all  these  points,  his  position  is  decisive,  and  strongly 
taken  against  the  scepticism  which  is  so  fearfully 
prevalent  in  both  England  and  America,  in  the  form 
of  an  avowed  rejection  of  these  facts  and  truths,  and 
of  a  secret  misgiving  that  they  may  perhaps  be 
outgrown,  or  set  aside  by  the  progress  of  modern 
thinking. 

He  insists  also  upon  the  supreme  authority  of  the 
Scriptures  in  respect  to  all  questions  of  religious 
faith,  and  upon  their  permanent  and  indispensable 
superiority  above  all  other  books,  as  composed  by 
men  divinely  aided  and  inspired.     But  he  contends, 


b  PKEFACE    TO   THE    AMEKICAX    EDiriON". 

that  to  assert  for  thera  any  higher  authority  or  inspi- 
ration, is  to  claim  for  them  more  than  they  claim  for 
themselves,  as  well  as  to  take  a  position  that  is  both 
untenable  and  damaging  to  the  interests  of  Christi- 
anity. To  explain  and  vindicate  what  the  anthor 
believes  to  be  the  correct  view  of  inspiration,  is  one 
of  the  principal  objects  of  this  treatise.  He  has  had 
the  sagacity  to  discern,  and  the  courage  to  avow,  that 
the  question  of  inspiration  must  be  fairly  met,  and  can 
no  longer  be  either  safely  or  honestly  thrust  aside. 
Dr.  Arnold  of  Rugby  wrote  in  1835  of  "the  ap- 
proaches to  that  momentous  question,  which  involves 
in  it  so  great  a  shock  to  existing  notions ;  the  great- 
est, probably,  that  has  ever  been  given  since  the  dis- 
covery of  the  falsehood  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Pope's 
infallibility.  Yet  it  must  come,  and  will  end,  in 
spite  of  the  fears  and  clamours  of  the  weak  and  bigot- 
ed, in  the  higher  exalting  and  more  sure  establishing 
of  Christian  truth."  The  author  of  Llber  Libeoedm 
believes  that  the  time  for  discussing  this  question  has 
fully  come,  and  he  discusses  it  like  a  brave  and 
honest  man,  by  looking  squarely  in  the  face  the  diffi- 
culties which  attend  the  traditional  theories.  He 
does  not,  however,  write  for  those  whose  heireditary 
faith  is  as  yet  undisturbed,  but  for  the  '  reluctant 
sceptics '  who  find  insuperable  difficulties  in  accept- 


PREFACE   TO   THE    AMERICAN    EDITION.  9 

ing  what  they  conceive  to  be  the  current  views  of 
Christianity  and  the  Scriptures. 

His  leading  positions  may  be  briefly  characterised 
by  those  which  he  opposes  and  rejects. 

1.  He  opposes  the  "  bibliolatry "  which  idolizes 
the  letter  of  the  Scriptures  as  against  the  claims  of 
the  Scriptures  themselves,  and  the  spirit  of  their 
contents. 

2.  He  opposes  the  pretensions  of  High  Church 
arrogance,  and  the  pharisaism  of  sensuous  ritualism. 

3.  He  rejects  also  the  narrowness  of  that  theolo- 
gical dogmatism  which  reads  every  term  and  phrase 
of  its  creed  and  catechism  between  the  lines  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  refuses  to  revise  the  traditions  of 
schools  of  theology  by  the  aid  of  better  methods  of 
interpretation. 

It  would  be  idle  to  expect  that  all  the  opinions 
expressed  in  a  volume  written  in  such  a  spirit,  and 
with  such  aims,  will  or  ought  to  satisfy  every  reader. 
Some  of  these  opinions  are  given  as  conjectures; 
others  are  manifestly  not  well  considered.  Some  of 
the  views  of  the  writer,  in  respect  to  future  retribu- 
tion, will  be  generally  set  aside,  as  unsupported  by 
the  testimony  of  the  Scriptures.  In  respect  to  some 
points  the  work  betrays  marks  of  haste,  both  in 
thought  and  composition.     But  its  spirit  is  earnest, 


10  PREFACE   TO   THE   AMERICAN    EDITION. 

honest,  and  Christian.  It  is  believed  that,  as  a  whole 
it  is  eminently  adapted  to  relieve  the  difficulties  of 
the  "reluctant  sceptic,"  and  that  it  will  be  wel- 
comed by  all  those  Christian  believers  who,  in  these 
times  of  trial  to  their  common  faith,  have  full  con- 
fidence that  a  frank  recognition  of  the  difficulties  of 
their  argument  is  the  only  wise  method  of  securing 
for  it  a  triumph.  While  the  book  is  not,  and  does 
not  claim  to  be,  an  exhaustive  argument  for  the 
truth  of  Christianity,  it  has  at  least  this  merit,  that 
it  successfully  defends  it  against  the  ignorance  and 
weakness  of  many  of  its  defenders. 


PEEFACE. 


Whatever  may  be  the  cause,  it  is  but  too  certain 
that  in  the  present  day,  both  at  home  and  abroad, 
multitudes  of  religious  young  men,  who  a  few  years 
ago  would  have  ranked  as  believers,  are  now,  instead 
of  attaching  themselves  to  the  Church,  silently  but 
rapidly  becoming  alienated  from  all  Christian  wor- 
ship and  communion. 

'  The  fact,'  says  a  recent  writer,  '  may  be  explained 
as  a  passing  fashion,  or  as  the  result  of  a  certain 
phase  of  opinion,  but  it  is  a  fact.  And  its  gravity 
is  heightened  by  the  circumstance  that  we  meet  it  in 
men  whose  lives  are  pure,  who  exhibit  least  of  the 
worldly  self-seeking  spirit,  who  are  among  the  most 
thoughtful  and  cultivated.  The  conventional  formu- 
lae of  the  indifference  of  the  corrupt  heart  or  of  the 
love  of  earthly  things  are  wholly  insufficient  to  ex 
plain  a  state  of  mind  than  which  none  is  fraught 
with  greater  danger.' 


1 2  PREFACE. 

This  general  unsettlement  of  religious  belief,  it 
is  further  remarked,  has  '  grown  from  within  /  the 
outcome  of  it  is  a  scepticism  reluctant  rather  than 
aggressive,  which  in  some  of  the  best  men  is  rapidly- 
passing  the  border  of  intellectual  hesitation.' 

The  secret  of  the  success  which  now  attends  publi- 
cations intended  to  advance  a  destructive  criticism 
is,  that  '  they  speak  to  men  already  '  perplext  in 
faith,  but  pure  in  deeds,'  w^ho  received  with  their 
first  instruction  in  Christianity  statements  of  doctrine 
which,  in  the  time  of  mature  reflection,  appear  to 
contradict  the  Divine  instincts  of  justice,  mercy,  and 
truth, — the  image  of  God's  own  eternity  in  the  heart 
of  man.  These  doctrines,  taught  as  necessary  infer- 
ences from,  or  as  identical  with  the  facts  of  Chris- 
tianity, were  once  acquiesced  in  as  the  creed  of 
Christendom,  but  now,  in  not  a  few  cases,  repulsion 
follows  the  attempt  to  read  and  understand  them  by 
the  light  of  reason  and  conscience.'"^ 

That  it  may  be  very  diflicult  to  render  service  to 
such  persons  without  paining  or  perplexing  timid 
and  anxious  spirits  is  but  too  probable ;  but  every- 
thing of  a  merely  personal  character  ought  surely 
to  be  risked  by  Christians  on  behalf  of  men  and 
women  who,  even  in  their  unbelief,  have  not  cast 
off  the  reverential  feehng  for  Scripture  which  they 
acquired  in  youth,  and  who  are  always  willing  to 
allow  that  to  a  Bible  training  they  mainly  owe  the 
light  and  life  in  and  by  which  they  now  see. 

*  Contemporary  Review,  art.  'Indian  Questions,'  No.  1,  p.  125. 


PftEFAOE.  13 


The  following  Correspondence  will  perhaps  serve 
to  explain  the  state  of  things  to  which  reference  has 
been  made,  better  than  any  merely  general  observa- 
tions could  do. 


March  1867. 


OOEEESPOl^DEl^^CE. 


A    LETTER. 


My  deae  , 

Your  request  that  I  should  lay  frankly  before  you 
luy  views  regarding  the  Bible,  and  that  I  should  state  dis- 
tinctly the  particular  diflBculties  which  have  led  me  to  reject  it, 
is  certainly  a  reasonable  one.  Yet  I  can  scarcely  enter  on 
the  subject  without  pain ;  nor  would  I  pursue  it,  did  I  not 
feel  rather  desirous  of  explaining  to  you  the  true  position  of 
a  multitude  of  young  men  who  are  but  too  often  maligned  or 
misunderstood. 

Regarding  myself,  I  need  only  say  that  you  have  known  me 
too  long  and  too  well  to  be  in  any  danger  of  attributing  my 
unbelief  to  moral  perversion.  My  manner  of  life,  from  my 
youth  up,  has  been  no  secret  to  you,  and  I  have  consequently 
little  fear  that  you  will  so  grossly  misjudge  me  as  to  suppose 
that  I  have  any  wish  to  escape  obligation  by  cherishing  seep 
ticism,  or  any  desire  to  justify  lawlessness  by  denying  Divine 
Law.  But  I  wish  to  say  a  word  or  two  on  this  point  for 
others. 

The  unbelievers  of  the  present  day,  so  far,  at  least,  as  I  have 
come  into  contact  with  them,  are  not,  as  you  seem  to  think, 


16  CORRESPONDENCE. 

irreligious  men.  They  are  not  mockers,  neither  do  tliey  sit  in 
the  seat  of  the  scornfuL  Hundreds  of  them  are,  at  the  present 
hour,  'wearying  their  souls  to  solve  the  problem  how  to  con- 
ciliate the  convictions  to  which  the  tendencies  of  the  age  have 
borne  them  with  respect  for  time-honoured  institutions,  and 
tenderness  for  the  faith  of  those  whom  they  most  love  and 
honour.' 

You  would  be  surprised  to  find  how  many  of  these  have 
been  educated  evangelically ;  how  many  of  them  are  persons 
of  pure  minds,  generous,  benevolent,  and  self-denying;  how 
willing  many  of  them  are  to  admit  that  to  the  Christian  edu- 
cation they  have  received  they  owe  everything  they  possess. 

It  is  a  mistake  to  imagine  that  all,  or  even  the  greater  part, 
of  these  persons  either  deny  the  truth  of  Christianity,  or 
shrink  from  avowing  their  conviction  that  Jesus  Christ  was 
the  greatest  and  best  being  that  ever  dwelt  on  earth.  They  do 
not  dispute  that  the  Bible  has,  in  many  respects,  a  4laim  to  be 
regarded  as  the  first  of  books.  What  they  deny  is,  its  Divine 
character,  its  authority,  its  infallibility.  They  are  conscious 
enongh  of  the  darkness  which,  apart  from  revelation,  hangs 
over  the  world  in  which  they  live,  but  they  do  not  see  evidence 
that  the  Bible  has  removed  that  darkness.  On  the  contrary, 
the  more  the  world  advances  on  its  way,  and  the  greater  the 
extent  of  human  knowledge,  the  deeper  seems  to  them  the 
gloom  and  mystery  which  encompasses  all  things.  Life  and 
Death  they  regard  alike  as  unknown  and  unknowable.  Shad- 
ows, in  the  view  of  some^  fall  even  on  the  character  of  God.  His 
very  existence  is  by  such  at  times  doubted.  Whether,  if 
existent.  He  is  benevolent  or  malignant,  they  think  cannot  be 
proved.  It  is  'possible,  they  say,  when  in  these  moods,  that 
God  i«;  possible  that  He  is  good;  possible  that  after  death, 
life  may  be  renewed ;  but  nothing  is  certain. 

To  aflSrni  that  men  who  are  in  this  state  of  mind  are  un- 
happy is  often,  but  not  always,  true ;  for  the  mind,  like  the 
eye,  can  accustom  itself  to  darkness  as  well  as  to  light,  and 


A    LETTER    FROM    A    SCEPTIC.  17 

where  absolute  certainty  cannot  be  obtained,  the  soul  can 
find  rest  even  in  a  bare  possibility. 

Anythinfir,  they  think,  is  better  than  a  Gospel,  so  called, 
wliich  is  in  fact  no  gospel  or  good  news  at  all,  since  it  consigns 
all  but  a  fraction  of  the  human  race  to  irremediable  sorrow ; 
which  exaggerates  human  sin,  and  limits  Divine  mercy;  which 
throws  no  sunshine  on  the  dark  spots  that  rest  upon  human- 
ity, and  which  brings  no  balm  to  those  that  need  it  most — the 
slaves  of  evil,  of  ignorance,  and  of  superstition. 

As  a  rule,  however,  they  have  no  wish  to  undermine  the 
faith  of  others,  and  no  desire  to  deprive  anyone  of  consola- 
tions which  are  dear  to  him.  Their  spirit  is  critical,  but  not 
contemptuous;  it  is  historic,  not  intolerant.  They  disbelieve 
in  miracles,  but  they  have  no  disposition  to  laugh  at  those  who 
hold  to  them.  That  which  is  to  believers  a  question  of  Life  or 
Death  is  to  them  a  matter  of  pure  indiiference.  Where  others 
are  enthusiastic,  they  are  calm  and  judicial. 

To  these  men  I  adhere.  Their  number  is  much  greater  than 
you  think,  and  it  is  constantly  increasing.  They  have  their 
faults  without  doubt,  but  in  this  respect  they  are  only  on  a  par 
wnth  their  opponents.  They  may  sometimes  forget  what  is 
due  to  the  cherished  beliefs  of  wise  and  good  men  who  have 
inherited  the  opinions  of  a  dead  past,  but  the  rudeness  is  not 
wanton  ;  it  arises  from  the  absence  of  reverence  for  what 
others  esteem  to  be  Divine  rather  from  any  feeling  of  ani- 
mosity. Forgive  them  this  wrong,  and  believe  me  when  I  say 
that  whatever  your  opinion  may  be  of  any  of  us,  our  own  con- 
viction is  that  we  are  doing  a  good  work,  that  we  are  striving 
to  establish  the  principle  of  freedom  of  enquiry,  in  opposition 
to  that  of  acquiescence  in  dogmas  utterly  at  variance,  as  we 
think,  not  only  with  the  discoveries  of  science,  but  with  the 
first  principles  of  morality. 

We  are  ready  to  avow  our  belief  that  the  Bible  is  respon- 
sible for  the  prevalence  of  the  dogmas  to  which  we  object,  and 
therefore,  '  while  we  admit  the  good  that  is  to  be  found  in  it. 


IS  COKKESPONDENCE. 

while  we  neither  altogether  reject  or  despise  its  teachings,  we 
cannot  allow  it  to  be  held  in  the  estimation  that  has  hitherto 
been  accorded  to  it,  nor  can  we  permit  either  it  or  anything 
else  to  come  between  conscience  and  God.' 

TVe  think  that  the  Bishop  of  Natal  has  demonstrated  that 
the  Sacred  Records,  as  they  are  called,  are  not,  as  a  whole, 
historical,  and  therefore  that  the  moral  and  spiritual  proposi- 
tions contained  in  these  books  cannot  be  authoritative.  When, 
therefore,  we  find  in  Scripture  actions  recorded  and  commend- 
ed which  are  immoral;  commands  given  which  are  iniquitous  ; 
and  statutes  ordained  which  are  unjust ;  we  put  them  aside 
just  as  we  should  do  if  they  were  found  in  any  other  book. 
We  maintain  that  many  things  in  the  Bible  are  untrue,  and 
others  morally  wrong ;  among  the  latter  we  reckon  the  Mosaic 
laws  regarding  slavery,  and  the  instructions  given  for  the  ex- 
termination of  whole  tribes.  We  are  amazed  and  confounded 
when  we  discern  that  some  of  these  things  have  been  pal- 
liated in  the  writings  of  a  man  so  great  and  good  as  was  Dr. 
Arnold,  and  that  even  Lord  Macaulay  should  speak  of  the 
Jews  as  specially  selected  by  God  to  be  'the  ministers  of  His 
vengeance,  and  specially  commanded  by  Him  to  do  many 
things  which,  if  done  without  His  authority,  would  have  been 
atrocious  crimes.'  The  principle  which  underlies  this  demoral- 
ising process  is,  I  need  not  say,  more  speciously,  and  therefore 
more  perniciously,  laid  down  by  Bishop  Butler  in  his  '  Anal- 
ogy.' 

On  the  general  question  of  inspiration,  my  own  notion  is 
that  it  ought  not  to  be  regarded  as  anything  peculiar  to  the 
past,  since  we  are  all,  in  a  certain  sense,  inspired.  All  truly 
great  men  are  unquestionably  inspired  men.  On  your  own 
showing,  every  Christian  is  inspired  who  is  made  a  partaker 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Do  you  not  recognise  this  faqt  when  you 
pray,  '  Cleanse  the  thoughts  of  our  hearts  by  the  inspiration 
of  thy  Holy  Spirit  V  Do  you  not  affirm  it  when  you  claim  for 
the  godly  the  promise  of  the  Comforter — '  He  shall  guide  you 


A   LETTEK    FKOM    A    SCEPTIC.  19 

into  all  truth?'  Can  you,  then,  really  believe  that  Biblical 
inspiration  is  anything  more  or  less  than  the  combination  in 
the  writers  of  the  two  fold  gift — genius  and  piety?  I  myself 
agree  with  Mr.  F.  W.  Newman,  when  he  says  that  only  one 
kind  of  inspiration  can  be  admitted,  namely,  that  of  '  an  ordi- 
nary influence  of  the  Divine  Spirit  on  the  hearts  of  men,  which 
quickens  and  strengthens  their  moral  and  spiritual  powers,  and 
is  accessible  to  all  (in  a  certain  stage  of  development)  in  some 
proportion  to  their  own  faithfulness.'  Of  course,  this  is  but 
intuition,  and,  holding  it,  the  value  and  importance  of  revela- 
tion in  the  Scriptures  becomes  very  small  indeed :  but  I  cannot 
help  that. 

Professor  Strauss  somewhat  expresses  my  thought  when  he 
says  that  '  God  has  revealed  Himself  to  mankind  at  all  times 
— in  their  own  minds,  in  the  works  of  creation,  in  the  history 
of  the  nations,  and,  finally,  in  some  particularly  gifted  men 
whom  He  raised  up  as  lawgivers  and  prophets,  as  teachers  and 
apostles.  Such  men  have  risen  among  all  nations,  but  chiefly 
amongst  the  Jews,  who  very  early  entertained  the  notion  that 
there  is  but  one  God,  that  He  is  the  Almighty  Creator  of 
heaven  and  earth,  that  He  is  not  to  be  represented  by  any 
image  or  likeness,  that  He  is  the  Holy  Lawgiver,  the  just 
Ruler  of  the  destinies  of  mankind.  The  religious  writings  of 
the  ancient  Jewish  nation  being  the  only  ones  in  which  this 
foundation  of  true  religion  is  to  be  found  so  pure  and  strong 
(for  which  reason  even  the  New  Testament  relies  on  and 
appeals  to  the  Old  in  this  respect)  they  are  also  holy  to  us ;  and 
the  books  of  looses  and  Samuel,  the  Psalms,  and  the  Prophets 
are  indispensable  to  our  edification. 

'But  they  are  not  trustworthy  as  records  of  actual  facts. 
Several  remarkable  events  undoubtedly  happened  to  the  Israel- 
itish  nation,  chiefly  in  the  early  period  of  their  history;  they 
had  escaped  from  servitude  in  Egypt  under  strange  circum- 
stances, and  after  a  long  migration  they  had  conquered  the 
land  of  Canaan  in  bloody  wars.     These  occurrences,  of  course. 


20  CORRESPONDENCE. 

continued  to  live  in  the  mouths  of  the  people  from  generation 
to  generation.  At  length  some  pious  Israelite,  dwelling  on 
the  Divine  activity  with  regard  to  the  departure  from  Egypt, 
imagined  it  in  the  form  in  which  it  stands,  as  if  God  had 
ordered  Moses  in  an  oral  conversation  to  deliver  His  people — 
as  ifB.e  had  visibly,  in  the  pillar  of  cloud  and  of  fire,  marched 
before  the  army,  and  so  forth.  This,  written  down  in  after 
times,  is  probably  the  real  origin  of  the  relations  thereof  in 
those  writings  that  are  commonly  called  the  books  of  Moses.' 
In  this  way,  that  which  is  recorded  in  the  Old  Testament  as 
supernatural  may,  I  think,  be  accounted  for. 

So  with  the  New  Testament.  '  The  first  Christians  natu- 
rally asked  themselves  whence  in  Christ  comes  this  clearness 
of  mind,  this  sublimity  of  spirit,  this  purity  of  heart  which  is 
nowhere  else  to  be  found  in  any  human  being  ?  He  was  not 
produced  by  sinful  seed^  was  their  answer;  He  immediately 
descended  from  God,  the  fountain  of  all  lig?it.  This  most 
likely  gave  rise  to  the  relations  of  His  supernatural  production 
contained  in  the  Gospels  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke.  As  a 
higher  spirit  S^e  appeared  to  have  come  down  upon  this  earth 
for  a  short  time;  after  His  departure  from  it  Re  seemed  to 
have  returned  to  God,  whence  He  came.  This  again  gave  rise 
to  the  relations  of  His  resurrection  and  ascension,  and  so 
forth.' 

'  Christ  will  indeed  come  back  to  judge  the  world  ;  only  His 
coming  to  judge  us  is  not  one  that  is  always  delayed  from  cen- 
tury to  century,  and  never  takes  place ;  but  the  Lord  passes 
judgment  every  day,  for  He  has  given  His  spirit  in^o  our  hearts 
to  judge  us :  punishing  us  when  we  are  doing  or  coveting  evil, 
and  rewarding  us  with  peace  and  happiness  when  we  are  guided 
and  governed  by  it.  And  thus  our  inward  judge — our  con- 
science— purified  and  sharpened  by  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  is 
adjudging  and  preparing  to  us  already  in  this  life  reward  or 
punishment,  happiness  or  sorrow,  according  to  what  we  de- 
serve.     This  clearly  indicates  that  also  in  a  future  life  the 


A   LETTER    FROM   A    SCEPTIC.  21 

Divine  Judge  will  assign  to  each  of  us  that  mansion  in  His 
Father's  house  which  he  has  made  himself  worthy  of  here  ou 
earth. '^ 

I  grant  that,  in  one  sense,  under  this  mode  of  treatment,  the 
Book  goes,  but  in  another  it  remains;  remains  'to  be  read 
more  intelligently  than  ever,  not  as  the  infallible  Word  of 
God,  which  it  is  not,  but  the  fallible  word  of  man,  which  it 
is  ;  read  as  containing  a  record,  not  of  what  God  said  and  did, 
but  of  what  the  best  minds  in  past  ages  thought  God  said  and 
did.  Truth  in  this  way  develops.  The  God  of  David  is  an 
improvement  on  the  God  of  the  book  of  Joshua.  Isaiah's  God 
is  not  like  the  God  of  Moses  or  of  Abraham.  The  "Father" 
revealed  by  Jesus  is  holier,  wiser,  and  purer  than  them  all. 
Men  will  indeed  have  to  give  up  the  superstitions  of  other 
days — the  dogmas  that  were  accepted  on  trust — the  dreams 
of  dim  ages  past  and  gone ;  but  they  will  build  on  a  surer 
foundation — they  will  have  a  nearer  and  a  dearer  faith  in  One 
who  speaks  to  His  faithful  sons  to-day ;  and  they  will  build 
their  faith  and  hope  on  a  better  thing  than  an  infallible  book 
(even  though  they  could  have  it),  for  they  will  build  ou  an 
infallible  God,  who  will  give  to  all  who  seek  Him  the  witness 
of  His  own  blessed  Spirit  that  "  now  are  we  the  sons  of  God." 
Then  we  shall  all  see  plainly  that  the  Bible  is  our  helper  and 
not  our  master;  that  it  belongs  to  the  experience  and  the 
literature  of  the  past ;  and  that  while  we  reverence  and  study 
it,  we  are  not  to  build  all  our  hopes  upon  it,  but  that  we  are 
to  trust  to  the  same  God  as  David  and  Jesus  trusted  in,  that 
we  may  receive  in  the  same  way  and  to  the  same  end,  the 
wisdom  that  made  them  wise  and  the  inspiration  that  made 
them  good.  The  Bible  is  a  book  of  the  past,  and  it  necessarily 
reHects  the  errors  and  the  limited  experience  of  the  past.'  '^ 

>  The  opinions  of  Professor  David  Strauss,  as  embodied  in  his  letter  to  tho 
Burgomaster  llirzell,  Professor  Orelli,  and  Professor  llitzig,  at  Zurich,  translated 
and  printed  for  general  circulation  as  a  tract. 

3  'The  Light  that  Pains,'  a  tract  printed  for  gratuitous  distribution. 


22  CORRESPONDENCE. 

But,  apart  from  these  views,  many  enquiries  must  be  made 
before  I  can  accept  the  Bible.  Take  the  four  Gospels  for  in- 
stance. How  am  I  to  know  who  wrote  them,  or  wlien  they 
were  written  ?  How  am  I  to  ascertain  what  means  of  know- 
ledge the  writers  had,  and  whether  or  no  they  were  eye-wit- 
nesses of  what  they  record  ?  If  they  were  not,  I  must  be  told 
how  they  got  their  information.  These,  and  many  similar 
questions,  which  you  good  people  never  seem  to  trouble  your- 
selves about,  appear  to  me  to  be  essential  and  imperatively  to 
require  an  answer. 

Do  not,  however,  suppose,  I  pray  you,  that,  being  in  this 
sceptical  condition,  I  must  of  necessity  be  altogether  destitute 
of  serious  piety.  By  no  means.  I  can,  and  do  still  occa- 
sionally, worship  both  in  the  Established  Church  and  among 
Nonconformists.  "What  I  agree  with  I  unite  in  ;  what  I  dissent 
from  I  leave  unnoticed.  My  tastes  lead  me  to  ^prefer  litur- 
gical to  free  prayer,  and  I  cannot  but  think  that  one  day  we 
shall  have  forms  for  public  devotion  sufficiently  aesthetic  to 
gratify  the  religious  sentiment,  without  involving  dogmas 
which  lead  only  to  dispute.  It  certainly  must  be  allowed  that 
Christianity,  whether  in  all  respects  true  or  not  in  the  shape 
we  have  it,  is  eminently  useful,  highly  consolatory  to  the 
poor  and  dependent,  a  restraint  on  many  which  could  be  ill 
spared,  and  an  occasion  of  constant  kindness  and  benevolent 
activity. 

Further,  in  the  absence  of  individual  conviction,  Church 
authority,  if  not  pressed  too  far,  offers  many  advantages. 
Amid  the  restlessness  and  discomfort  engendered  by  profitless 
enquiry,  it  is  a  satisfaction,  in  the  absence  of  anything  better, 
to  admit  the  fact  that  the  Church  represents  the  belief  of  cen- 
turies, whether  those  beliefs  be  accurate  or  not ;  and  that  con- 
fidence in  her,  whether  well  grounded  or  otherwise,  at  least 
ensures  quiet,  by  pacifying  where  it  may  not  satisfy,  and  by 
fostering  habits  the  tendency  of  which  must  unquestionably  be 
favorable  to  domestic  happiness,  to  social  comfort,  and  to  the 


A   LETTEE  FROM    A    SCEPTIC.  23 

interests  of  law  and  order  among  all  classes  in  the  common- 
wealth. 

Such  is  my  case.  I  have  been  perfectly  frank  with  you  iu 
stating  it,  and  I  cannot  but  hope  that  you  will  answer  mo 
in  a  similar  spirit. 

Believe  me  to  be, 

Yours  cordially, 


ai.) 

THE  REPLY. 
My  Dear , 

You  do  me  but  justice  when  you  express  confi- 
dence that  I  shall  not  attribute  the  intellectual  wanderings  of 
the  son  of  my  dearest  friend  to  moral  causes.  I  have  no  right 
to  do  this  in  any  case.  It  is  deeply  to  be  regretted  that  be- 
lievers should  so  often  be  harsh  in  their  judgments  of  those 
who,  while  honest  and  respectful  in  their  treatment  of  Scrip- 
ture, are  unable  to  arrive  at  settled  convictions  regarding  its 
authority.  Be  assured  that  the  highest  faith  is  not  favorable 
either  to  bigotry  or  uncharitableness.  Confidence  in  the  Bible, 
when  it  arises  from  supposed  triumph  in  argument,  or  from  a 
blind  and  hereditary  acceptance  of  its  claim,  is,  I  am  quite 
aware,  but  too  often  accompanied  by  an  unloving  and  self- 
righteous  feeling  toward  unbelievers;  but  this  fault  is  rarely 
found  among  persons  who  feel  and  acknowledge  that  their  joy, 
in  truth,  is  the  result  of-  a  su7}jective  experience  of  its  value, 
derived  from  the  source  and  fountain  of  all  truth.  And  for 
obvious  reasons.  The  faith  which  is  subjective  carries  with  it 
that  sense  of  certainty  which  alone  gives  repose  to  the  spirit — 
a  repose  favorable  alike  to  humility  and  respect  for  the  con- 
sciences of  others,  and  every  way  out  of  harmony  with  either 
anger  or  arrogance.  Only  such  a  faith  is,  properly  speaking. 
Divine;  for  '  the  light  in  which  a  man  can  no  longer  call  man 
"  master  "  is  light  in  which  he  can  no  longer  desire  to  be 
called  "master."  He  who  has  this  faith  will  rarely  venture 
to  say  when  and  how,  and  to  what  extent,  his  brother  man  is 
rebellious  to  light  and  guiltT/  in  respect  of  unbelief ;  will  rarely 
2 


26  CORRESPONDENCE. 

attempt  to  decide  as  to  who  is  leaning  to  his  own  understand- 
ing, or  who  receiving  the  Kingdom  of  God  as  a  little  child.'  ^ 

And  now  you  must  allow  me  to  say  that  I  think  you  have 
taken  far  too  favourable  a  view  of  a  class  who  seem  to  me  any- 
thing but  models  for  sincere  and  serious  enquirers.  Honest 
doubt,  honestly  dealt  with,  is,  I  believe,  injurious  to  no  one ; 
but  doubt  encouraged  and  indulged  soon  becomes  a  habit  of 
the  mind,  and  a  very  unwholesome  one  too,  not  unfrequently 
weakening,  and  sometimes  destroying  the  very  capacity  for 
estimating  moral  evidence.  It  is  by  no  means  rare  to  meet 
with  doubters  who  are  so  unreasonahle  in  relation  to  their 
difficulties  that,  in  dealing  with  them,  one  is  more  tempted  to 
question  the  healthiness  of  the  brain  than  the  integrity  of  the 
purpose.  It  is  '  the  fool '  who  says  in  his  heart  '  there  is  no 
God.' 

Some  men  of  this  stamp  whom  I  have  known  were  obviously 
under  the  influence  of  an  intense  and  morbid  egotism,  and 
others  were  so  completely  in  bondage  to  a  sense  of  the  ludi- 
crous that  they  seemed  absolutely  incapable  of  dealing  with 
anything  seriously^  which  could,  by  a  little  perverted  inge- 
nuity, be  made  to  look  grotesque.  Few  sceptics,  I  think,  are 
distinguished  by  the  possession  of  a  robust  and  well-balanced 
intellect.  I  doubt  not  that  among  these  persons  are  to  be 
found  many  who  may  fairly  claim  to  be  regarded  with  the 
greatest  consideration  and  respect.  But  this  is  not  the  case 
with  all.  As  among  believers  are  to  be  seen  weak  minds  as 
well  as  strong  ones ;  bad  men  as  well  as  good  men ;  persons 
who  are  able  to  give  a  sound  reason  for  the  hope  that  is  in 
them,  as  well  as  persons  who  can  give  no  reason  at  all :  so 
among  unbelievers  there  are  not  a  few  who  but  too  plainly 
indicate  that  self-complacency  and  conceit  have  had  very 
much  to  do  with  their  doubts,  while  others  are  as  clearly  the 
victims  of  pride  and  a  rebellious  will — persons  who  are  ob- 

1  Thoughts  on  Revelation,  with  Special  Eeference  to  the  Present  Time.  By 
John  McLeod  Campbell. 


BEPLY   TO   THE   DOUBTER.  27 

viously  destitute  of  all  reverence^  and  perhaps  it  is  not  too 
much  to  say  disbelievers  alike  in  truth  and  goodness.  All  this 
may  surely  be  allowed,  without  disputing  for  a  moment  w^hat 
you  have  advanced  in  favour  of  your  friends. 

In  relation  to  your  own  difficulties,  it  will  only  be  possible, 
in  a  brief  letter  like  this,  to  glance  generally  at  some  consi- 
derations which  you  seem  to  me  to  have  overlooked. 

Your  views  of  inspiration  are  of  course  not  mine.  I  cer- 
tainly regard  Biblical  inspiration — for  I  here  speak  of  that 
only — as  something  very  different  from  either  genius  or  piety, 
whether  single  or  combined.  I  do  not  think  it  at  all  akin  to 
what  we  sometimes  call  the  inspiration  of  the  poet,  of  the 
painter,  of  the  sculptor,  or  of  the  musician.  I  am  far,  indeed, 
from  disputing  that  the  Giver  of  every  good  and  perfect  gift 
may  justly  be  regarded  as  endowing  men  of  genius  with  all 
that  distinguishes  them  from  their  fellows,  but  when  I  speak 
of  Holy  Scripture  as  inspired  I  use  the  word  in  a  much  higher 
sense  than  this.  I  regard  that  book — so  far  as  it  is  God- 
breathed  at  all — as  inspired  in  such  an  exceptional  way  as  to 
remove  its  revelations  altogether  out  of  the  rank,  even  of  the 
highest  of  merely  human  compositions. 

I  admit,  indeed,  that  you  would  have  good  ground  for 
maintaining  the  continuance  of  inspiration  amongst  us,  if  your 
application  of  the  text  quoted  was  a  right  one.  But  it  is  not 
so.  It  is  a  very  serious  and  mischievous  mistake  to  apply  the 
words,  '  He  shall  guide  you  into  all  truth,'  to  every  believer. 
To  do  so,  except  in  a  'cery  limited  sense,  is,  in  my  judgment,  to 
destroy  the  broadest  distinction  that  can  be  pointed  out 
between  inspired  and  uninspired  communications.  I  am 
always  asliamed  at  the  arrogance — however  disguised  as 
Immility — which  is  implied  when  good  men  say,  as  many  do, 
'  the  Holy  Spirit  has  taught  me  this  or  that;  God  fulfils  His 
promise,  and  guides  me  into  all  truth  ;'  when  they  ought  to 
say,  '  God  has  revealed  in  the  Bible  all  truth  needful  for  my 
salvation  from  evil,  and  for  my  spiritual  growth.     Just  as  I 


28  COEEESPONDENCE. 

come  to  that  book  in  a  right  spirit,  free  from  pride  and  preju- 
dice, from  selfishness  and  sectarianism  ;  not  governed  by  in- 
ferior motives,  not  moved  by  the  desire  that  such  or  such  an 
opinion  of  mine  may  be  confirmed  by  Scripture,  but  onl}- 
anxious  to  know  what  the  Book  says  ;  in  other  words,  just  so 
far  as  I  am  purified  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  my  will  is 
brought  into  harmony  with  the  Divine  will,  shall  I  attain  wis- 
dom. On  the  other  hand,  just  in  proportion  as  I  come  to  the 
written  word  under  the  influence  of  evil,  of  self-will,  of  bigotry, 
or  of  given  theological  systems,  shall  I  be  liable  to  delusion 
and  darkness.  That  which  was  promised  to  thtf  Apostles  was 
not,  171  the  same  sense^  promised  to  me.  The  Lord  led  them 
into  all  truth,  hy  direot  revelation.,  that  they  might  be  the 
instructors  of  the  Church  in  all  ages.  The  Lord  will  lead  me 
into  all  truth,  only  by  the  subjection  of  my  will — by  giving  me 
instructors  of  the  Church  in  all  ages.  The  Lord  will  lead  mo 
into  all  truth,  only  by  the  subjection  of  my  will — by  giving  mo 
a  loving,  candid,  and  fearless  spirit;  by  purifying  and  eleva- 
ting my  moral  nature,  and  by  bringing  me  in  this  state  of  mind 
into  heartfelt  contact  with  the  revelations  of  Scripture.' 

These  are  my  views ;  and  I  wish  you  to  believe  that,  in 
holding  thera,  I  am  anything  but  insensible  to  the  difticulties 
which  embarrass  us,  in  presenting  what  may  be  regarded  by 
men  in  general  as  satisfactory  proof  of  many  things  that  we 
often  take  for  granted,  such  as  miracles,  the  authorship  and 
authenticity  of  the  four  Gospels,  the  formation  of  the  canon, 
and  much  beside.  I  hope,  before  long,  to  lay  before  you  some 
thoughts  by  which  you  will  see  how  these  things  present 
themselves  to  my  own  mind. 

I  am,  I  confess,  greatly  astonished  to  find  that  you  should 
be  able,  with  the  amount  of  natural  good  sense  you  possess, 
to  accept  Strauss's  ideological  theor}^,  and  to  content  yourself 
with  the  assumption  tliat  from  some  unknown  cause  or  other 
— for  a  special  revelation  is  denied — the  Jews,  although  every 
way  inferior  in  general  culture  to  the  surrounding  nations, 
were,  even  in  the  very  earliest  times,  immeasurably  before 
others  in  the  knowledge  of  God ;  so  much  so,  that  the  writers 


REPLY   TO   THE   D0T7BTER.  29 

of  the  New  Testament  properly  '  rely  upon  and  appeal'  to 
thera  in  this  respect ;  nay,  that  we  ourselves,  with  equal  pro- 
priety, regard  some  portions  at  least  of  Jewish  literature  as 
'  holy  and  indispensable  to  edification.'  We  believers  say  so 
too,  and  our  reasons  for  thus  judging — whatever  they  may  be 
worth — are  before  the  world.  But  what  are  yours  ?  The 
books  themselves,  according  to  your  view,  while  'professing  to 
be  historical,  are  really  not  so ;  the  writers,  Avhoever  they 
might  be,  are  confessedly  untrustworthy,  for  while  they 
broadly  and  repeatedly  assert  that  such  and  such  things  are 
facts,  they,  in  reality,  only  imagined  them.  What  these  '  pious 
Israelites '  assert  to  have  received  directly  from  God  they 
really  invented  in  order  to  account  for  things  they  could  not 
otherwise  explain.  When  they  affirm  in  the  most  unmistake- 
able  terms  that  certain  miraculous  occurrences  took  place,  such 
as  the  presence  of  the  pillar  of  cloud  and  the  passage  of  the 
Red  Sea,  they  only  'imagined  the  Divine  activity,'  and  wrote 
as  if  the  events  had  actually  transpired  ;  this^  you  say,  is  the 
real  origin  of  the  relations  given  in  the  writings  commonly 
called  the  Books  of  Moses.  In  like  manner  the  narratives  of 
the  jN"ew  Testament  are  but  evolutions  of  human  thought, 
utterly  untrue  if  presented  as  facts,  yet  true  as  relations  of 
what  'the  best  minds  in  past  ages  thought  God  said  and  did.' 

The  theory  further  supposes  that  when  these  early  intuitions 
took  shape,  and  were  by  somebody  or  other  formed  into  a 
book,  and  ultimately  accepted  as  national  annals,  the  compilers 
or  inventors  gained  their  end  by  moulding  the  whole  into  a 
history  the  very  reverse  of  what  might  reasonably  have  been 
expected  on  the  supposition  that  the  object  was  to  present 
documents  likely  to  be  pleasing.  For  what  is  this  Jewish  his- 
tory as  we  have  it,  whether  true  or  false,  but  a  record  of  early 
degradation,  of  continued  ingratitude,  of  perversity,  obstinacy, 
and  crime  ?  Of  the  early  judges  one  (Ehud)  is  represented  a? 
an  assassin ;  another  (Abimelech),  the  son  of  a  concubine,  i? 
said  to  have  murdered  all  his  family,  and  to  have  been  cruel 


30  CORRESPONDENCE. 

enough  on  one  occasion  to  have  burnt  alive  about  a  thousand 
helpless  captives,  men  and  women ;  a  third  (Jephthah)  in  civil 
strife  slays  above  40,000  of  his  countrymen  ;  a  fourth  (Sam- 
son) is  but  a  half-civilized  giant ;  and  the  state  of  the  country 
generally  is  at  one  period  morally  degraded  to  such  an  extent 
that  one  entire  tribe — Benjamin — had  to  be  all  but  extirpated. 
Again,  what  an  unsatisfactory  history  is  that  of  Saul !  What 
dark  stains  rest  on  David  !  What  a  sad  ending  is  that  of 
Soloruon  !  What  a  catalogue  of  sins  and  idolatries  defaces  the 
glory  of  succeeding  monarchs !  Granting,  for  the  sake  of 
argument,  that  Ezra  and  his  scribes,  instead  of  finding  the 
records  said  to  have  been  discovered,  invented  them,  this,  at 
least,  follows  :  that  such  a  history,  if  not  felt  to  be  as  true  as 
it  was  humiliating,  would  certainly  have  excited  popular  in- 
dignation and  been  rejected  at  once. 

I  am  bound,  however,  to  suppose  that  you  really  believe  the 
narratives  of  Scripture  to  be  intentions^  and  that  you  also 
believe  in  their  utility  and  in  the  piety  of  the  men  who  set 
them  afloat,  for  you  say  you  doj  but  I  could  not  have  accepted 
such  a  statement  on  any  authority  short  of  your  own.  For 
wliat  does  it  involve?  Certainly  this — that  falsehoods  are  not 
only  innocent  but  useful,  '  absolutely  edifying  ;'  that  men  may 
be,  at  one  and  the  same  time,  untrustworthy  and  yet  'pious  ;' 
that  'the  best  minds  in  past  ages'  were  justified  in  putting 
forth  what  they  had  only  thought^  as  what  they  had  seen  and 
heard ;  in  affirming  that  their  subjective  feelings  were  actual 
and  objective  facts.  I  am  quite  willing  to  admit  that  a  super- 
natural revelation  has  its  diflaculties  ;  but  were  those  difficul- 
ties ten  times  greater  or  more  numerous  than  they  are, 
they  would  not  approach  the  contradictions  which  are  in- 
separable from  the  theory  you  have  adopted.  Talk  about 
the  moral  difficulties  of  the  Bible,  why  they  shrink  into  abso- 
lute insignificance  when  compared  with  an  hypothesis  which 
annihilates  all  distinction  between  right  and  wrong,  truth  and 
falsehood,  giving,  in  fact,  to  falsehood  the  moral  power  of 
truth,  to  wrong-doing  the  efficacy  of  that  which  is  right. 


REPLY   TO    THE   DOUBTER.  31 

You  will  perhaps  say  this  is  not  fair  ;  that  it  is  surely  pos- 
sible for  a  man  to  idealize  honestly,  and,  more  than  tliis,  to 
present  ideal  thought  to  himself  and  to  others  with  all  the 
vividness  and  force  of  objective  reality,  without  thereby 
becoming  either  a  cheat  or  a  charlatan.  I  admit  that  such  a 
case  is  possible,  but  not  in  relation  to  the  narratives  of  Scrip- 
ture. M.  lienan  has  been  attempting  this  feat  very  lately,  in 
relation  to  the  Resurrection,  and  never  was  there  a  more 
signal  failure.  Facts,  as  has  been  well  said,  '  will  not  bend  to 
tliis  process.'  There  never  were  narratives  less  ideal  or  more 
straightforward  in  their  reality  ;  they  might  have  been  pur- 
posely framed  to  contrast  with  professed  accounts  of  visions, 
and  to  exclude  the  possibility  of  their  being  confounded  with 
such  accounts.  The  recitals  show  little  care  to  satisfy  our 
curiosity,  or  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  inconsistency  in  de- 
tail; but  nothing  can  be  more  removed  from  vagueness  and 
hesitation  than  tlieir  definite,  positive  statements.  It  is  not 
criticism,  but  mere  arbitrary  license,  to  say  that  these  facts 
stand  for  fancies.  The  very  notion  is  trifling  and  incredible. 
We  may  disbelieve  if  we  will ;  but  to  endeavour  to  make  out 
that  plain  assertions  are  visions,  is  but  to  take  refuge  in  the 
most  unhkely  of  guesses.^ 

There  is  no  fact  in  history  more  certain  than  that  Jesus 
Christ  appeared  in  Judea  at  the  time  He  is  said  to  have  done, 
that  He  was  crucified,  that  He  was  believed  by  His  disciples 
to  have  risen  from  the  dead,  that  '  many  professing  to  have 
been  original  witnesses  of  that  event  and  of  the  Christian 
miracles  generally,  passed  their  lives  in  labours,  dangers,  and 
sufferings  voluntarily  undergone  in  attestation  of  the  accounts 
which  they  delivered,  and  solely  in  consequence  of  their  belief 
of  the  truth  of  those  accounts.'*  May  I  not  add,  and  call  you 
and  your  friends  as  witnesses,  that  motives  connected  with 
these  beliefs  have  in  all  ages  elevated  and  ennobled  those  who 

1  Saturday  Review,  art.  on  Kenan's  Des  Apotres. 

2  Paley's  Evidence,  motto  to  cap.  ii,-ix. 


32  COEEESPONDENCE. 

have  received  them  into  their  hearts  with  simplicity  and  love  ? 
The  theory  of  Strauss  is  absolutely  worthless. 

And  now  for  your  assertion  that  in  the  Bible  may  be  found 
commands  which  are  immoral  and  iniquitous,  such  as  those 
which  direct  the  massacre  of  the  Canaanites  and  sanction 
cruelty  to  slaves. 

Let  us  take  first  the  slaughter  of  the  Canaanites.  What  I 
have  to  show,  according  to  you,  is  that  since  God  did  com- 
mand the  destruction  of  these  people,  He  was  right  in  doing 
so.  To  this,  however,  I  demur.  In  accepting  the  Pentateuch 
as  historically  true,  I  am  simply  bound  to  show,  first,  that  the 
assertion  of  a  Divine  command  to  the  Israelites  to  take  j^osses- 
sion  of  Canaan  hy  force,  is  inseparable  from  the  rest  of  the 
narrative ;  and  then  to  state  the  limitations  under  which,  as 
I  imagine,  such  phrases  as  'The  Lord  said'  or  'The  Lord 
spake  '  oughl^  to  be  received. 

I  do  not  myself  think  Lord  Macaulay's  way  of  putting  the 
matter,  although  a  very  common,  is  a  right  one.  I  see  no 
evidence  either  that  the  Jews  were  (except  in  an  indirect  and 
limited  sense)  '  the  ministers  of  God's  vengeance,'  or  that  they 
had  a  commission  to  extirpate  the  nations  of  Canaan.  Least 
of  all  can  I  admit  that  they  were  '  specially  commanded  by 
God  to  do  many  things  which,  if  done  without  His  authority, 
would  have  been  atrocious  crimes.'  Right  and  wrong  are  not 
different  things  in  God  and  man,  nor  can  even  the  Divine 
Being  rightfully  do  to-day  what  He  Himself  declared  to  be 
wrong  yesterday,  for  right  is  always  and  eternally  right. 

The  argument  that  such  or  such  a  proceeding  appears  to  us, 
when  judged  hy  the  light  of  the  Gospel^  to  be  unjust,  cruel,  or 
any  way  wrong,  is  a  very  sound  one  for  doubting  whether  God 
ever  sanctioned  it — a  powerful  reason  for  demanding  good 
evidence  that  He  did  so  ;  but  it  reaches  no  further.  If  it  can 
be  satisfactorily  shown  that  God  did  really  command  this  or 
that  thing  to  be  done,  we  must  bow  in  silence  ;  unless,  indeed, 
we  mean,  with  our  limited  faculties,  and  still  more  limited 


REPLY   TO   THE   DOUBTER.  33 

knowledge,  to  set  ourselves  up  as  wiser  or  better  than  our 
Maker.  I  cannot,  however,  admit  for  a  moment  that,  whether 
commanded  by  God  or  not,  tlie  conquest  of  Canaan  by  the 
Israelites  was  m  itself  an  atrocious  crime,  except  on  the  theory 
which  neither  you  nor  I  hold  to,  that  war  for  purposes  of  con- 
quest is,  under  all  circumstances^  criminal. 

But  the  question  for  our  consideration  is  :  Did  God,  in  very 
deed,  command  the  massacre  of  the  Canaanites?  A  prior 
question  of  course  arises,  which  is  this :  When  God  communi- 
cates His  will  to  man,  does  He  do  it  in  such  a  way  as  not  only 
to  render  mistake  as  to  the  command  itself  impossible,  but 
also  to  secure  infallibility  as  to  the  means  employed  in  its 
execution  ? 

To  neither  of  these  questions  can  an  absolutely  affirmative 
reply  be  given.  Admitting — which  we  certainly  must,  if  we 
hold  to  the  Book — that  God  spake  unto  Moses,  Joshua,  and 
Samuel,  intelUgihly ^  whether  revealing  His  character,  or  com- 
manding certain  things  to  be  done,  we  are  nevertheless  alto- 
gether in  the  dark  as  to  the  mode  in  which  this  was  accom- 
plished. We  cannot  get  beyond  the  Apostolic  statement,  that 
the  same  God  who  hath  'in  these  latter  days  spoken  unto  us 
by  His  Son,'  did  '  at  sundry  times  and  in  divers  manners  speak 
unto  the  fathers  by  the  prophets '  (Heb.  i.  1). 

But,  accepting  this  statement,  what  follows?  Why  clearly 
this  :  that  as  a  true  apprehension  of  the  message  of  '  the  Son' 
is  made  dependent  on  the  state  of  the  heart  of  each  individual 
to  whom  it  comes,  so  must  it  be  with  every  message  God  gives 
or  sends  to  the  children  of  men.  Eminently  is  this  the  case 
when  the  communication  relates  to  anything  that  has  to  he 
done  1)1/  man.  Paul  had  to  withstand  Peter  as  a  man  to  be 
bhamed  in  relation  to  the  particular  course  he  was  pursuing  in 
doing  God's  work.  Moses,  in  fulfilling  a  Divine  command, 
sinned  grievously  ;  nor  is  there  the  slightest  reason  to  suppose 
that  any  servant  of  God  is,  or  ever  was,  free  from  liability  to 
error  in  executing  the  Divine  will,  if  pride  or  ambition,  or 
2* 


34  CORRESPONDENCE. 

selfish  passion  in  any  form,  mingles  with  the  work.  Before, 
therefore,  we  '  charge  God  foolishly '  with  sanctioning  wrong, 
let  us  be  quite  sure  that  He  commanded  the  thing  to  be  done 
in  the  way  it  was. 

The  ordinary  impression  seems  to  be  that  a  constant  and 
direct  intercourse  went  on  between  the  early  rulers  of  the  Jews 
and  their  Heavenly  King,  under  which  error  was  impossible ; 
that  every  act  of  the  government  was  directed  and  regulated 
by  intimations  from  above ;  that  the  judges  or  governors  of 
Israel  were  but  the  passive  recipients  of  Divine  instructions ; 
that  the  obedience  rendered  was  therefore,  to  a  great  extent, 
mechanical,  leaving  little,  if  any,  place  for  the  judgment  of  the 
statesman.  Something  like  this  is  commonly  held  by  persons 
who,  without  much  reflection,  think  and  speak  of  the  people 
of  Israel  as  placed  under  a  theocratic  government.  But  such 
a  view  of  things  cannot  be  sustained  from  Scripture.  On  the 
contrary,  there  can  be  no  question  as  to  the  fact  that  intima- 
tions of  the  Divine  will,  as  to  what  the  Jews  should  do  under 
given  circumstances,  always  left  room  for  wisdom  or  folly  in 
the  execution,  for  judgment  or  want  of  judgment  in  the  ruler, 
for  partial  or  entire  obedience  in  the  people. 

The  distinctions  commonly  drawn  by  Christian  writers 
between  the  old  dispensation  and  the  new,  generally  involve 
error  in  the  way  of  exaggerating  differences.  Lord  Bacon 
asserts  broadly  that  '  Prosperity  is  the  blessing  of  the  old  Tes- 
tament ;  but  that  adversity  is  the  blessing  of  the  New.'  Arch- 
bishop Whately,  annotating  on  this  observation,  remarks  : 
'  The  distinguishing  characteristic  of  the  old  covenant,  of  the 
Mosaic  Law,  was,  that  it  was  enforced  by  a  system  of  temporal 
reicards  and  judgments^  administered  according  to  an  extraor- 
dinary (miraculous)  providence.  The  Israelites  were  promised 
as  the  reward  of  obedience,  long  life,  and  health,  and  plentiful 
harvests,  and  victory  over  their  enemies.  And  the  punish- 
ments threatened  for  disobedience  were  pestilence,  famine, 
defeat,  and  all  kinds  of  temporal  calamitv.     These  were  the 


REPLY    TO    THE    DOTJBTEK.  35 

rewards  and  punishments  that  formed  the  sanction  of  tlie  Mo- 
saic law.  But  tlie  new  covenant,  the  Gospel,  held  out  as  its 
sanction,  rewards  and  punishments  in  the  next  world,  and 
these  only.' 

Facts,  however,  do  not  bear  out  these  statements,  except  with 
inany  limitations.  Asaph  was  so  perplexed  by  observing  the 
prosperity  of  the  wicked  in  life,  and  their  tranquillity  in  death, 
contrasting^  as  he  saw  it  did,  with  the  frequent  misfortunes  of 
the  rigliteous,  that  he  could  get  no  peace  until  he  went  into 
the  house  of  God  and  meditated  on  their  latter  end  (at  the  day 
of  judgment).  And,  on  the  other  hand,  certainly  nothing  can 
be  more  true  than  your  assertion  that  God  is  judging  us  all 
every  day,  sometimes  rewarding  and  sometimes  inflicting  pun- 
ishment, according  to  a  man's  obedience  or  disobedience. 

The  truth  is,  we  commonly  fall  in  this  matter  into  a  double 
mistake.  We  are  foolish  enough  to  think  that  because  the 
aption  of  God  is  not  always  obvious  to  us.  He  has  now  less  to 
do  with  the  world's  affairs  than  He  once  had.  We  exaggerate 
the  extent  of  His  interference  in  former  times,  because  it  related 
more  than  it  does  now  to  the  outward  and  visible.  We  ought 
to  remember  that  at  no  time  does  God  manifest  Himself  more 
frequently  or  more  directly  than  is  needful,  while  at  all  times 
He  leaves  us  to  apphj  the  principles  He  has  laid  down  to  prac- 
tical life,  as  a  part  of  our  probation,  a  course  which  of  necessity 
involves  the  possibility  of  error  on  our  side. 

The  declaration,  'The  Lord  said,'  'The  Lord  spake,'  or 
phrases  of  similar  import,  occur  probably  a  hundred  times  in 
the  Pentateuch  alone,  and  in  by  far  the  greater  part  of  these 
cases  the  words  are  used,  not  as  asserting  in  each  separate 
case  a  direct  and  immediate  Divine  revelation,  but  as  implying 
the  settled  convictions  of  the  speaker  as  to  the  Divine  will. 
They  denote  in  these  cases  tlie  application  of  Divine  statements 
to  given  circumstances,  by  good,  but  human  and  therefore 
fallible,  men.  Further,  we  are  strangely  apt  to  forget  that 
'the  severity'  of  God  is  far  more  seen  in  His  dealings  with 


36  C0ERE8P0NDENCE. 

the  choaen  people  tlian  with  their  enemies.  In  the  wilderness, 
on  one  occasion,  fourteen  thousand  die  of  plague,  on  account 
of  transgression.  On  another,  many  perish  by  the  sword.  On 
a  third,  the  earth  opens  and  swallows  up  offenders.  On  a 
fourtl},  fiery  serpents  are  sent  in  punishment;  while  the  fright- 
ful calamities  brought  upon  Judea  by  tlie  Romans,  to  say 
nothing  of  the  previous  overthrow  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Chal- 
deans— all  these  events  being  distinctly  put  before  us  as  judi- 
cial— involved  miseries  quite  as  great  {^  any  that  the  Canaan- 
ites  suffered. 

In  relation  to  these  nations,  the  assumjytion  almost  always 
made  is,  that  God  commanded  their  entire  extirpation  on 
account  of  their  crimes.  But  this  is  not  sustained  by  the 
narrative.    The  command  is,  '  Thou  shalt  drive  them  out  before 

thee Thou  shalt  make  no  covenant  with  them,  nor 

with  their  gods.  They  shall  not  dwell  in  thy  land,  lest  they 
make  thee  sin  against  Me.'  (Exod.  xxiii.  32-33.)  'Ye  shall 
destroy  their  altars,  break  their  images,  and  cut  down  their 
groves :  lest  thou  take  of  their  daughters  to  thy  sons,  and  go 
a-whoring  after  their  gods.'  (Exod.  xxxiv.  11-17.)  The  pro- 
mise, renewed  from  time  to  time,  is :  'I  will  send  hornets 
before  thee,  which  shall  drive  out  the  Hivite,  the  Oanaanite, 
and  the  Hittite  from  before  thee.'  Again :  '  I  will  send  an 
angel  before  thee ;  and  I  will  drive  out  the  Oanaanite.'  (Exod. 
xxxiii.  2.)  Further,  as  a  fact,  'multitudes  of  them  did  flee, 
some  into  Africa,  and  others  into  Greece.  Procopius  says 
they  first  retreated  into  Egypt,  but  gradually  advanced  into 
Africa,  where  they  built  many  cities.'  ^  They  were  never 
destroyed,  except  when  their  evil  influence  could  not  in  any 
other  way  be  got  rid  of. 

When  the  Israelites ybw^A^,  they  naturally  adopted  the  ordi- 
nary laws  of  war — the  only  laws  which  prevailed  in  tlieir 
time — and,  in  accordance  therewith,  they  slew  or  made  slaves 
of  their  enemies.  Had  the  Canaanites  been  the  conquerors,  they 
would,  in  like  manner,  have  slain  or  enslaved  the  Israelites. 

1  Calmet,  edited  by  Taylor. 


EEPLY   TO   THE   DOUBTEE.  37 

*But,'  you  will  say,  'the  Lord,  according  to  the  Bible,  com- 
manded the  slaughter  of  women  and  children/  This,  how- 
ever, is  not  as  clear  as  at  first  sight  it  seems  to  be.  The  first 
instance  in  which  this  practice  occurs  is  in  the  case  of  the 
Midianites,  who  had  brought  such  grievous  calamities  on  Israel 
by  seducing  the  people  to  idolatry  and  immorality,  in  order 
that  they  might  offend  God.  (Numb.  xxv.  1-18  and  xxxi,  IG.) 
Here  they,  in  the  first  instance,  slew  only  the  kings  of  Midian 
and  their  warriors.  Moses,  however,  is  wroth  at  this  forbear- 
ance, and  commands  the  execution  of  all  the  male  children  and 
of  all  the  women  who  were  not  virgins.  That  the  great  law- 
giver was  justified  in  so  doing  we  have  no  right  to  assume. 
His  motive  was  doubtless  the  preservation  of  the  people,  but 
he  does  not  appear  to  have  had  any  Divine  sanction  for  this 
severity.  (Numb.  xxxi.  14-20.)  A  little  later  we  have  a 
recital  of  the  general  direction  to  '■drive  ouf  all  the  inhabi- 
tants, and  to  'destroy  all  their  pictures  and  images,'  but  no- 
thing is  said  about  killing  the  people.  (Numb,  xxxiii.  52-56.) 
This  direction  had,  however,  been  exceeded  by  the  Israelites, 
for  when  Sihon,  king  of  the  Amorites,  refused  to  let  them 
pass,  they  destroyed  all  they  overcame,  even  the  women  and 
the  little  ones.  In  thus  acting,  they  but  too  plainly  imitated 
the  habits  of  the  nations  by  which  they  were  surrounded. 

Once  embarked  in  this  ruthless  course,  they  pursued  it  in 
the  case  of  Og,  king  of  Bashan,  as  well  as  with  others.  Moses 
certainly  approves  this  slaughter  in  his  address  at  Horeb,  giv- 
ing as  the  reason  the  prevention  of  intermarriages,  and  conse- 
quent idolatry.  (Deut.  vii.  1-11  and  xx.  16-18.)  Joshua  fol- 
lows the  example  at  Jericho  (Josh.  vi.  21);  at  Ai  (viii.  25); 
at  Lachish,  at  Debir,  and  in  other  places  (x.  40).  But  it  is 
here  to  be  remarked,  that  this  course  is  only  taken  with  those 
tribes  who  came  into  battle.  It  is  evident  that  the  Canaanites 
might  have  made  peace  if  they  would,  for  it  is  remarked, 
'  There  was  not  a  city  that  made  peace  with  the  children  of 
Israel,  save  the  inhabitants  of  Gibeon.' 


38  CORKESPONDENCE. 

If  Moses,  in  the  address  referred  to,  was  infallible — if  ho 
was  but  the  mouthpiece  of  God  in  the  directions  he  gives  to 
save  alive  of  the  seven  nations  'nothing  that  breatheth' — it 
is  clearly  not  for  us  to  dispute  the  command ;  but  if,  as  Dr. 
Pye  Smith  has  put  it,  '  the  sanction  of  the  New  Testament  to 
the  inspiration  of  the  Old  extends  only  to  'holy  things,'  and 
that  '  to  attach  it  to  other  things  is  to  lose  sight  of  its  nature, 
and  to  misapply  its  design,'  it  is  at  least  an  open  question 
whether  this  was  the  case.  That  God  was  not  pledged^  so  to 
speak,  to  extirpate  the  Oanaanites,  although  He  supernaturally 
assisted  the  Israelites  in  obtaining  possession  of  the  land,  is 
clear  from  the  fact  that  the  rcorh  was  not  done  wherever  it  was 
unnecessary.  Miraculous  aid,  indeed,  appears  to  have  been 
withheld  after  the  primary  end — possession  of  the  land — 
had  been  attained.  We  are  distinctly  told  that  the  children 
of  Israel  could  not  drive  out  the  Jebusites.  (Josh.  xv.  63.) 
And,  again,  '  The  Lord  was  with  Judah,  and  he  (Judah)  drave 
out  the  inhabitants  of  the  mountain ;  but  could  not  drive  out 
the  inhabitants  of  the  valley,  l>ecause  they  had  chariots  of  iron.'' 
(Judg.  i.  19.)  In  other  cases,  when  the  Israelites  became 
strong  enough  to  conquer,  they  not  only  refrained  from  slaugh- 
ter, making  the  people  tributary,  and  dwelling  among  them, 
but  intermarried,  became  idolatrous,  and  forsook  the  God  of 
their  fathers.  (Judg.  iii.  5-7.)  As  a  consequence  of  this  apos- 
tasy, they  became  themselves,  from  time  to  time,  slaves :  first, 
to  the  king  of  Mesopotamia  (iii.  8j,  then  to  the  Moabites  (iii. 
14),  then  to  the  Oanaanites  (iv.  2,  3),  and  then  to  the  Midian- 
ites  (vi.  1).  During  all  these  years,  Israel  enjoyed  the  Divine 
help  only  at  long  intervals,  and  then  providentially  rather  than 
theocratically,  since  it  was  by  the  raising  up  of  men  as  deliver- 
ers who  were  sometimes  anything  but  good  or  godly. 

You  will  perhaps  say  I  have  purposely  omitted  any  notice 
of  a  case  which  cannot  be  explained  by  the  foregoing  consider- 
ations, viz.,  that  of  the  Amalekites  destroyed  by  Saul  under 
the  directions  of  Samuel.     (1  Sam.  xv.  2,  3.)     The   prophet 


EEPLT   TO   THE    DOtTBTEE.  39 

here  certainly  claims  to  speak  for  God,  when  he  says  to  Saul, 
'  Go  and  smite  Amalek,  and  utterly  destroy  all  that  they  have, 
and  spare  them  not ;  but  slay  both  man  and  woman,  infant 
and  suckling,  ox  and  sheep,  camel  and  ass.'  The  comn^and 
appears  to  have  been  executed,  except  in  so  far  as  Agag  him- 
self was  concerned  and  the  cattle.  For  saving  these,  Saul  is 
rejected  from  being  king  over  Israel  (xv.  23). 

The  question  arises.  Did  Samuel,  in  issuing  this  command, 
act  by  the  immediate  direction  of  God,  or  was  the  order  given 
under  an  erroneous  impression  that  in  this  act  of  destruction 
he  was  but  carrying  out  a  Divine  threatening,  and  justifiably 
accomplishing  a  great  work  of  retribution  ?  Probably  the  lat- 
ter. He  believed,  doubtless,  that  he  was  but  uttering  the 
Divine  Will  when  he  said,  '  Hearken  thou  unto  the  voice  of 
the  words  of  the  Lord,'  and  yet  it  is  anything  but  certain  that 
he  was  right  in  thus  speaking.  He  was  evidently  not  infallible 
or  quite  free  from  secondary  motives  in  what  he  did  as  the 
representative  of  God,  or  he  would  not  have  appointed  his  sons 
judges — men  '  who  turned  aside  after  lucre,  and  took  bribes, 
and  perverted  judgment.'  (1  Sam.  viii.  3.)  He  was  now  old, 
and  if  he  erred  in  the  one  instance  why  should  he  not  in  the 
other?  Besides,  it  is  not  a  little  remarkable  that  while  he 
tells  Saul  that  God  had,  on  account  of  this  act  of  disohedlence^ 
rejected  him  from  being  king,  he  had,  before  this  occurrence^ 
deposed  the  son  of  Kish  for  offering  sacrifice  without  authority 
(xiii.  13,  14). 

That  there  was  not  the  mme  degree  of  personal  superintend- 
ence, so  to  speak,  on  the  part  of  the  Divine  Being  over  the 
Israelites,  after  the  making  of  the  golden  calf,  as  there  had 
been  before,  is  evident  from  the  word  of  the  Lord  to  Moses  on 
tiiat  occasion:  'Go,  lead  the  people  into  the  place  of  which  I 
have  spoken  unto  thee:  behold  rairhe  AngeV  (as  distinguished 
from  the  more  immediate  presence  of  God  which  had  hitherto 
been  enjoyed)  'shall  go  before  thee.'  (Exod.  xxxii.  34.)  It 
has  been  supposed  by  some  that  this  was  reversed  on  the  inter- 


40  COEEESPONDENCE. 

cession, of  Hoses  (xxxiii.  12-17),  but  such  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  the  case.  The  'presence'  of  the  Lord  with  the 
angel  is  all  that  is  promised.  The  probability  is,  that,  step  by 
step,  the  more  immediate  interference  -of  God  was  exchanged 
for  ordinary  providential  government,  as  the  people  gradually 
assumed  the  position  and  responsibilities  of  an  organised  na- 
tion. If  this  be  true,  the  likelihood  of  the  command  to  destroy 
Amalek  being  given  by  Samuel  rather  than  by  God  is  greatly 
increased. 

It  is  clear  enough  that  none  of  the  judges  were  '  perfect 
before  God.'  Samson's  conduct  speaks  for  itself.  Gideon  kills 
Zeba  and  Zalmunna,  saying  he  would  have  saved  them  alive  if 
they  had  not  killed  his  brothers.  (Judges  viii.  19.)  Jephthah 
and  Gideon^  Deborah  and  Barak,  in  like  manner,  are  seen  to 
act  in  a  spirit  and  under  motives  which  are  far  from  being  un- 
mixed. Samuel,  like  them,  was  liable  to  err ;  nor  does  this 
conclusion  at  all  interfere  with  the  apostolic  declaration  that 
*  through  faith  '  these  very  men  '  subdued  kingdoms,  wrought 
righteousness,  obtained  promises,  and  (figuratively)  stopped 
the  mouths  of  lions.'  (Heb.  xi.  32.)  Great  faith  is  not  un- 
frequently  accompanied,  especially  in  warriors,  by  great  defects 
and  grievous  deficiencies. 

By  drawing  a  distinction,  then,  between  what  God  clearly 
commanded,  and  what  men  actually  did,  the  difiiculty  created 
by  the  massacre  of  the  Canaanites  in  great  measure  vanishes ; 
the  Jews  cease  to  be  '  ministers  of  Divine  vengeance,'  and 
crimes  committed  find  no  excuse  in  Divine  commands.  The 
wickedness  of  the  Canaanites  might  well  justify  their  expul- 
sion— a  wickedness  so  great  and  so  seductive,  that,  in  order  to 
prevent  its  spread,  '  the  Lord  went  before  '  both  the  children 
of  Lot  and  the  children  of  Esau,  driving  out  the  offenders,  just 
as  He  did  before  the  children  of  Israel.     (Dent.  ii.  21,  22.) 

And  now  let  us  look  at  the  question  of  slavery.  As  to  its 
permission  at  all  it  must  be  remembered  that  neither  under 


KEPLT    TO   THE   DOUBTER.  41 

the  old  covenant  nor  under  the  new,  does  God  ever  appear  to 
do  more  than  establish  principles,  which,  at  the  proper  time, 
and  when  men  are  somewhat  prepared  for  change,  are  sure  to 
overthrow  existing  wrongs.  Slavery,  polygamy,  the  gladia- 
torial shows,  feudalism,  and  many  other  evils,  have  all  in  turn 
fallen  by  processes  which  were  slow  in  operation,  but  sure  as 
to  their  result.  The  Israelites,  it  must  be  recollected,  although 
a  chosen  people,  had  been  long  slaves  in  Egypt,  and  when  they 
came  out  they  were  at  best  but  a  sort  of  half  savage  mob, 
although  wonderfully  oi;ganized.  The  legislation  both  of  the 
wilderness  and  of  the  promised  land  is,  in  all  cases,  adapted 
to  the  men  as  they  then  tcere,  and  to  the  world  as  it  existed  at 
that  time.  The  slaughter  or  the  slavery  of  conquered  tribes 
was  the  rule  everywhere.  Tyranny  and  oppression  of  the 
grpssest  kind  was  practised  by  every  neighbouring  people  with- 
out restriction  or  rebuke. 

The  Israelite  alone  was  under  a  law  which  required  him  to 
defend  the  weak,  and  to  carry  out  with  more  or  less  stringency 
the  great  principle  of  love  to  all  men.  To  what  an  extent  he 
failed  to  do  this  we  know  too  well ;  but  we  are  in  no  position 
whatever  fitting  us  to  judge  as  to  the  merit  or  demerit  of  any 
enactment  intended,  not  for  all  time,  but  for  a  peculiar  people, 
and  for  these  only  at  a  particular  period  of  their  history.  All 
revelation  is  of  necessity  progressive.  It  grows  with  the 
growth  of  ages.  Wisdom  always  adapts  itself  to  different 
times  and  to  different  conditions  of  men.  It  is  only  so  far  as 
the  eye  of  the  mind  is  opened  by  experience  and  discipline 
that  it  can  take  in  the  truth  which  is  presented  to  it. 

It  is  easy  to  seize,  as  Dr.  Oolenso  has  done,  upon  a  single 
enactment,  such  as  that  recorded  in  Exodus  (xxi.  21),  where, 
if,  after  a  severe  beating,  the  slave  survived  a  day  or  two,  the 
master  was  to  escape  punishment,  and,  assuming  it  to  be  a 
Divine  Law,  to  enlarge  on  the  cruelty  it  seems  to  sanction  ; 
but  in  so  doing  some  things  are  taken  for  granted,  and  other 
things  are  forgotten.     First,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  be- 


42  CORRESPONDENCE. 

cause  God  governed  Judea  theocratically  He  is,  so  to  speak,  to 
be  made  responsible  for  every  enactment  found  in  the  laws  of 
Moses.  A  greater  lawgiver  than  Moses,  indeed,  never  arose  ; 
a  man  more  richly  endowed  with  gifts  and  graces  fitting  him 
for  the  precise  work  he  had  to  do  never  lived ;  but  these  very 
gifts  prove  that  he  was  not  a  mere  passive  recipient  of  Divine 
instructions.  He  was  left,  without  doubt,  in  many  matters 
of  detail  to  judge  and  act  as  he  saw  best  for  the  people  he  had 
to  govern. 

A  distinction  is  clearly  drawn  between  the  giving  of  the  ten 
commandments  and  the  Mosaic  Law  generally.  Regarding 
the  first,  it  is  said,  '  the  Lord  spake  unto  you  out  of  the  midst 
of  the  fire.'  Re  '  declared  unto  you  His  commandments;  and 
He  icrote  them  upon  two  tables  of  stone.'  Regarding  the  last, 
'  The  Lord  commanded  me  at  that  time  to  teach  you  statutes 
and  judgments.'     (Deut.  iv.  12-14.) 

Why,  too,  should  we  shut  our  eyes  to  the  fact  that  '  many 
of  the  rites  prescribed  appear  to  have  been  taken  from  those 
of  the  Egyptians  ?  The  linen  garments  of  the  priests,  the 
long  hair  of  the  Nazarites,  the  offering  of  the  first  fruits,  and 
similar  ordinances,  betray  an  Egyptian  origin.  All  were  re- 
jected that  savoured  of,  or  countenanced  idolatry,  or  were 
unsuitable  to  the  national  character  and  state  of  the  Israelites. 
The  wisdom  of  not  introducing  new  rites  and  customs  is 
obvious.  The  people,  rude  and  uncultivated  as  they  were, 
would  have  been  reluctant  to  observe  strange  regulations. 
They  adhered  with  pertinacity  to  what  they  had  learned  and 
seen.  Hence  we  perceive  the  propriety  of  retaining  as  many 
old  ordinances  and  ceremonies  as  were  adapted  to  the  purpose 
which  God  had  in  view  by  giving  the  Levitical  law.'^ 

Further,  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  that,  by  the  very  same 
law  that  is  pronounced  so  cruel,  it  was  provijded  that  if  the 
slave  died  under  his  master's  hand  the  blood  of  the  man  should 
surely  be  avenged.     This  was  a  provision  which  would  tend 

1  Davidson's  Text  of  the  Old  Testament  Considered,  second  ed.  pp.  582-3. 


REPLY   TO   THE   DOUBTER.  43 

powerfully  to  check  any  rigour  which  was  accompanied  by 
such  a  risk.  As  a  fact,  the  Hebrew  slave,  wliether  reduced 
to  tliis  condition  by  criminality,  or  bought  with  money  of  the 
stranger,  was  incalculably  better  cared  for  than  he  would  have 
been  among  any  other  people.  If  a  Hebrew,  his  servitude 
terminated  at  the  end  of  six  years.  (Exod.  xxi.  2.)  Ilis  mas- 
ter was  admonished  to  treat  him  while  in  bondage  '  as  an  hired 
servant,'  and  '  not  to  rule  over  him  with  rigour.'  (Lev.  xxv. 
89-43.)  War  captives,  such  as  the  Canaanites  or  others,  as 
well  as  those  purchased  from  foreign  dealers,  were  protected 
by  statutes  unknown  elsewhere.  The  loss  of  an  eye  or  a 
tooth  was  to  be  recompensed  by  giving  the  slave  his  liberty 
(Exod.  xxi.  26,  27),  and  his  wilful  murder  entailed  the  same 
punishment  as  in  the  case  of  a  free  man.     (Lev.  xxi  v.  17-22.) 

On  the  whole,  it  can  scarcely  be  disputed  that  slavery,  as 
Mr.  Bevan  suggests  in  his  article  in  Smith's  Dictionary,  was 
in  the  Mosaic  law  recognised  mainly  '  with  a  view  to  mitigate 
its  hardships.  In  that  phase  of  society  which  prevailed  when 
these  laws  were  made,' he  remarks,  'slavery  was  commonly 
the  alternative  of  death  in  the  case  of  all  who  were  captured 
in  battle.  A  labouring  class,  in  our  sense  of  the  word,  was 
almost  unknown  to  the  nations  of  antiquity  ;  hired  service  was 
regarded  as  incompatible  with  freedom  ;  the  slave,  as  a  rule, 
occupied  the  same  social  position  as  the  servant  or  labourer 
of  modern  times,  though  differing  from  him  in  regard  to 
political  status.'  There  is  nothing  whatever  in  the  Mosaic 
laws  relating  to  slavery,  when  candidly  and  comprehensively 
considered,  which  in  the  slightest  degree  justifies  doubt  as  to 
the  Pentateuch  being  what  it  professes  to  be — a  true  delinea- 
tion of  God's  dealings  with  His  ancient  people. 

And  now  let  us  pass  on  to  other  subjects.  As  I  have 
already  observed,  T  perfectly  agree  with  you  when  you  say 
that  the  Lord  judges  us  every  day ;  but  I  am  quite  at  a  loss  to 
understand  on  what  ground  you  can  affirm  that  Christ  '  will 
come  hack  to  judge  the  world,'  since  you  neither  believe  that 


44  COKEESPONDENOE. 

God  has  appointed  a  day  (a  fixed  time)  for  that  purpose,  or 
that  He  who  is  to  be  the  judge  of  men  has  been  raised  from 
the  dead.  Denying  the  resurrection  of  Christ  as  an  objective 
fact,  how  can  you  hold  that  He  will  come  back?  Kefusing  to 
accept  what  the  Bible  says  as  to  the  beginning  of  the  world, 
and  rejecting  also  what  it  affirms  regarding  the  end  of  it,  it  is 
plain  that  in  your  view  '  all  things  continue  as  they  were 
from  the  beginning  of  the  creation  '  (2  Pet.  iii.  4,  5),  and,  for 
anything  you  know  to  the  contrary,  will  so  continue  for  ever. 
A  comforting  thought,  truly,  to  anyone  who  contemplates  the 
sin  and  misery,  the  oppression  and  wrong,  of  which  earth  is 
the  theatre,  and  a  thought  which  is  certainly  not  much  allevi- 
ated by  the  possibility  of  improvement  through  material 
agencies;  for  hitherto  'progress  '  has  brought  with  it  almost 
as  many  sorrows  as  joys,  by  no  means  'perceptibly  increasing 
the  sum  of  human  happiness.  Ah  !  my  dear  friend,  hide  it  as 
you  may,  unbelief  is  but  another  word  for  darkness  and  despair. 
You  continue  to  speak,  I  perceive,  of  the  '  witness  of  the 
Spirit,'  and  about  being  a  '  son  of  God  ;'  but  how  you  can  use 
such  terms,  or  arrive  at  any  assurance  that  yoar  faith  and 
hope,  such  as  they  are,  rest  on  a  good  foundation,  while  aban- 
doning Scripture,  I  am  at  a  loss  to  imagine ;  for  apart  from 
the  Divine  revelation  which  you  reject,  no  ray- of  light  falls 
upon  our  path.  You  may  tell  me  that  a  blind  man  has,  by 
intuition^  the  same  image  on  his  eye  of  hill  and  dale,  tree  and 
flower,  sun  and  stars,  that  I  have,  but  I  cannot  believe  you. 
I  should  insist  that  such  a  person  must  have  once  seen,  or  that 
if  not  recollections^  his  supposed  intuitions  were  but  concep- 
tions originating  in  the  descriptions  of  others.  So,  until  I  find 
a  man  brought  up  in  the  darkness  of  heathenism  and  alto- 
gether unacquainted  with  Scripture,  possessing  by  immediate 
revelation  from  God  a  sense  of  sonship,  a  witness  of  the  Spirit, 
and  a  faith  and  hope  akin  thereto,  I  must  decline  to  admit  that 
the  case  you  have  put  is  other  than  a  mere  imagination.  '  To 
affirm  that  each  man  at  once,  by  internal  illumination  alone, 


EEPLY    TO   THE   DOUBTEK.  45 

attains  a  clear  recognition  of  even  elementary  moral  and 
spiritual  truth,  is  to  ignore  the  laws  according  to  which  the 
soul's  activity  is  developed,  and  to  contradict  universal  ex- 
perience, which  tells  us  that  the  great  majority  of  mankind 
are  but  in  partial  possession  of  this  spiritual  and  moral  truth, 
and  hold  it,  for  the  most  part,  in  connection  with  the  most 
prodigious  and  pernicious  errors.'^ 

I  must  here,  however,  allow  that  you  are  to  some  extent 
right  in  saying  that  the  Gospel,  as  ordinarily  preached,  exag- 
gerates human  sin  and  limits  Divine  mercy.  It  exaggerates 
evil  however,  only  in  so  far  as  it  abandons  the  record ;  only  in 
so  far  as  it  equalises  transgression  of  all  kinds,  by  measuring 
the  guilt  of  sin,  not  as  God  does,  by  the  circumstances  under 
which  it  is  committed — such  as  the  ignorance  or  weakness 
of  the  sinner— but  by  the  glory  of  the  Creator,  and  the  dig- 
nity of  the  Divine  Redeemer.  It  limits  mercy  only  in  so  far 
as  it  makes — without  any  Scriptural  authority  for  so  doing — 
the  possiMlity  of  pardon  to  depend  on  conditions  which  can 
only  be  fulfilled  by  the  comparatively  few  who  here  become  ac- 
quainted with  the  Gospel ;  only  in  so  far  as  it  teaclies  that  the 
redeeming  love  of  the  Saviour  cannot  be  of  any  practical  bene- 
fit except  to  the  elect.  The  Bible  is  surely  not  responsible  for 
these  or  any  other  perversions,  nor  must  the  inferences  of  man 
be  confounded  with  the  revelations  of  God. 

My  letter  is  unduly  lengthening,  but  I  cannot  leave  entirely 
unnoticed  your  expectation — shall  I  not  say  hope  ? — that  one 
day  we  shall  have  'forms  of  public  devotion  sufficiently  a3sthetic 
to  gratify  the  religious  sentiment,  without  involving  dogmas 
that  lead  only  to  dispute.'  You  will  perhaps  be  surprised  if  I 
tell  you  that  I  think  this  very  possible.  But,  believe  me,  it 
will  only  be  when  Christendom,  so  long  apostate,  has,  in  retri- 
bution for  her  abominations,  become  absolutely  atheistic. 

That  a  tendency  of  this  kind  manifests  itself,  from  time  to 
time,  in  Rome,  especially  among  the  Jesuits,  has  been  noticed 
1  The  Eclipse  of  Faith:  a  Visit  to  a  Religious  Sceptic,  p.  297. 


4:6  cokkespondencp:. 

by  devout  Catholics,  and  is  regarded  by  them  with  grief  and 
anxiety.  'It  is  well  known,'  says  a  Catholic  writer  (probably 
belonging  to  the  Eastern  branch),  '  that  the  Jesuits  assisted,  or 
rather  guided  the  Pope,  in  bringing  out  the  last  dogma  of  the 
immaculate  conception  of  Mary.  They  acted  with  foresight, 
since  they  exalted  the  external  veneration  of  the  blessed 
Virgin,  which  latter  rests  on  Mary's  justification  and  sanctifi- 
cation  through  the  redeeming  merits  of  Christ — and  they  were 
thus  enabled  to  help  on  still  further  the  externalising  of  Chris- 
tianity. Externalism  is  superficiality ;  superficiality  is  frivol- 
ity ;  frivolity  means  manageaMeness  by  a  strong  spirit  and 
will.'  ^  What  England  has  chiefly  to  dread  in  the  present  ad- 
vancing love  of  ritualism  is  the  scepticism  it  hides  and  the 
frivolity  it  engenders  and  encourages;  each,  in  its  own  way, 
fatal  to  the  civil  liberty  which  arises  out  of  religious  individu- 
ality and  its  accompaniment — a  claim  that  the  supremacy  of 
conscience  shall  be  acknowledged. 

The  mediaeval  follies  of  Rome  will  not  always  be  endured ; 
but  her  aesthetic  worship,  her  ritualism,  the  'pillows' she  has 
in  store  for  all  doubters,  the  responsibilities  she  is  willing  to 
assume,  the  charm  of  her  ideal  unity,  her  blandishments,  and 
pomp,  and  pride  will  last;  and  when  these  are  separated — 
which  they  easily  may  be — from  any  particular  form  of  des- 
potism ;  when  the  Christian  element,  in  her  identical  icith  the 
medicBval,  is  eliminated  for  ever ;  when  the  true  piety  that  is 
in  her  departs ;  and  when  she  becomes,  as  she  then  will,  the 
embodiment  of  the  spirit  of  the  time — her  priesthood  intellec- 
tual, her  splendour  unexampled,  and  mankind  everywhere 
drunk  with  the  wine  of  her  fornication  ;  then,  I  say,  will  her 
mysterious  influence  survive  change,  and  instead  of  being 
weakened,  will  rule  the  world  with  greater  power  than  ever. 

Of  her  intolerance,  for  she  will  retain  that,  I  say  nothing ; 
on  the  predictions  which  shadow  forth  her  ultimate  ruin,  I  am 
here  silent;  but  I  cannot  help  calling  your  attention  to  the 

^  Overbeck  on  Catholic  Orthodoxy. 


REPLY   TO   THE   DOUBTER,  47 

point  where  scepticism  and  ritualism  meet ;  where  popery  and 
infidelity  fraternize,  and  wi]^  one  day  embrace  each  other. 
Beware,  I  entreat  you,  of  tliat  ending. 

Tbe  fault  that  saps  the  life 
Is  doubt  half  crushed,  half  veiled ;  the  lip  assent 
Which  finds  no  echo  in  the  heart  of  hearts. 

Far  better  is  it  to  be  restless,  even  to  iinhappiness,  tlian  to 
be  drugged.  Far  better  is  it  to  be  an  honest  unbeliever  than 
an  hypocritical  worshipper  ;  for  how  can  any  worship  be  other 
than  simulated  which  disregards  truth,  the  only  pabulum  of 
the  soul;  which,  proceeding  on  the  assumption  that  God  can- 
not be  known,  finds  in  forms  and  ceremonies  a  place  indeed  for 
a  sensuous  fancy,  but  none  for  the  best  aflfections  of  the  soul; 
whicli  substitutes  tbe  sentimental  for  the  heartfelt,  and  which, 
in  so  doing,  turns  away  man's  noblest  faculty — the  imagina- 
tion, '  the  chief  connective  link  between  the  visible  world  and 
the  invisible — from  its  appointed  task  of  spiritualising  the  senses, 
to  perform  the  ignoble  drudgery  of  sensualising  the  spirit." 

One  word  more,  and  I  have  done.  I  do  not  dispute  what 
you  say  as  to  the  utility  of  the  Christian  religion,  whether 
true  or  false  ;  but  I  most  firmly  hold  that  we  are  not  taught  in 
Scripture  that  faith  in  Christ  is  intended  to  be  chiefly  utili- 
tarian, or  that  it  is  a  system  revealed  for  the  improvement  of 
the  present  world.  Tbe  voice  of  God  is,  ''Behold,  I  niake  all 
things  new.'  Only  as  it  finally  accomplishes  the  reconstitution 
of  humanity  in  a  state  of  purity  and  blessedness  will  the  pur- 
pose of  God  in  its  introduction  be  fully  and  for  ever  answered. 

Some  points  to  which  you  have  referred  I  have  still  left  un- 
touched, but  I  hope  before  long  to  be  able  to  resume  the 
subject. 

Believe  me  to  be, 

Yours  very  truly. 


The  following  chapters  may  be  regarded  as  having  arisen 
out  of  the  foregoing  correspondence. 

'  Archdeacon  Hare's  Mission  of  the  Comforter. 


LIBER   LIBRORUM. 


CHAPTER    I. 

REVELATION   AND    INSPIRATION. 

Most  of  us,  in  this  country  at  least,  profess  to  believe 
in  a  Divine  revelation  embodied  in  an  inspired  book. 
We  may  therefore  perhaps,  for  our  present  purpose,  be 
allowed  to  assume  not  only  that  the  Father  of  our 
spirits  can,  if  He  will,  communicate  with  the  creatures 
He  has  made,  but  that  He  actually  has  done  so  through 
the  agency  of  man ;  and,  further,  that  these  communi- 
cations, whatever  may  be  their  value  or  extent,  ate 
included  in  the  book  we  call  the  Bible. 

The  point  for  consideration  is.  What  is  meant  by  this 
assumption  ?  Wliat  do  we  understand  by  Revelation, 
and  what  by  Inspiration  ?  Is  the  book  supposed  to  be 
inspired  infallible  in  its  utterances?  If  so,  does  tliis 
infallibility  extend  to  everything  which  is  therein  in- 
cluded? If  not,  how  is  the  inspired  to  be  distinguished 
from  the  uninspired,  the  human  from  the  Divine  ?  These 
are  the  questions  which,  in  one  form  or  other,  continu- 
ally present  themselves  for  solution,  and  which  the  men 
3 


50  LIBER   LTBROKTJM. 

of  this  generation  find  themselves  obliged  to  examine 
afresh,  and,  if  possible,  to  settle. 

Such  topics  cannot,  however,  be  disposed  of  lightly  or 
in  few  words,  for  they  involve  matters  which  must  be 
searched  out  honestly  and  without  reserve,  whether  the 
result  be  sadness  or  satisfaction.  They  are  not  mere 
abstract  enquiries.  The  Bible  exists,  and  the  very  fact 
of  its  existence,  to  say  nothing  of  its  history,  renders  it 
imperative  that  its  pretensions  should  be  either  sustained 
or  overthrown.  The  highest  minds  that  have  ever 
appeared  upon  earth  have  reverently  bowed  before  its 
teachings,  and  the  humblest  have  been  uj^held  by  its 
consolations.  If  all  alike  have  been  deluded,  the  delu- 
sion is  certainly  the  most  remarkable  that  has  ever 
occurred  in  the  history  of  our  race. 

Further,  the  Book  must  be  treated  by  itself,  and  apart 
altogether  from  any  deductions  that  have  been  drawn 
from  its  contents  ;  for  nothing  can  be  clearer  than  that 
Scripture  is  self-sustained  and  self-interpreting. 

The  Sacred  Writings  contain  '  a  record  of  facts,  and 
make  an  immediate  application  of  the  facts,  but  they  do 
no  more ;  life  and  not  thought  is  the  object  to  which 
they  primarily  minister,  and  so  they  minister  (as  no 
other  writings  ever  could  do)  to  thought  through  life. 
They  set  forth  a  truth  with  simple  distinctness,  but  do 
not  say  hoio  it  is,  or  ichy  it  is.'  ^  They  are  therefore 
absolutely  independent  of  all  commentators,  and  must 
not  be  mixed  up  with  any  inferences,  or  set  of  inferences, 
deduced  by  theologians  ;  with  any  series  of  propositions, 
true  or  false;   with   any  system  of  doctrine,  however 

*  Westcott  on  the  Resurrection. 


REVELATION   AND   INSPIRATION.  Oi 

apparently  conclusive,  which  may  at  any  time  have 
been  framed  from  the  record. 

Nor  should  the  Bible  be  regarded  as  the  only  channel 
through  which  God  speaks  to  man. 

Nature  is  a  revelation.  *The  heavens  declare  the 
glory  of  God,  and  the  firmament  showeth  Plis  handy- 
Avork.'  Men  are  justly  blameable  w^ho  fail  to  discern 
God,  more  or  less,  in  His  works.  *For  the  invisible 
things  of  Him,  from  the  creation  of  the  world  are  clearly 
seen  (being  understood  by  the  things  that  are  made), 
even  His  eternal  power  and  Godhead.'  The  guilt  of 
Paganism,  whether  ancient  or  modern,  is  to  be  measured 
by  the  extent  to  which  every  individual,  in  his  love  of 
idolatry  and  its  abominations,  turns  a  deaf  ear  to  the 
teachings  of  the  natural  world  regarding  the  one  God. 
The  apostle  Paul  asserts  this  when  he  argues  that  blind- 
ness and  perversity  shut  up  the  heathen  in  sin,  and 
necessitate  a  Redeemer ;  although  he  nowhere  says,  as 
many  persons  affirm,  that,  remaining  what  they  are 
during  life,  they  are  shut  out  of  the  Divine  compassion. 
This  conclusion,  however  common^  is  but  a  fallible,  and 
probably  very  inaccurate,  human  inference. 

Family  life,  again,  is  a  revelation.  The  ordinance  of 
parent  and  child  reveals  God  as  the  Father  of  spirits. 
Our  Lord  recognizes  this  when  He  says,  *  If  ye,  being 
evil,  know  how  to  give  good  gifts  unto  your  children, 
how  much  more  shall  your  heavenly  Father  give  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  them  that  ask  Him.' 

The  Bible  is  pre-eminently  such  only  in  so  far  as  it 
makes  God  known  to  us ;  only  in  so  for  as  it  unveils  the 
Divine  character,  or  discloses  Divine  designs ;  only  in  so 
far  as  it  casts  light  on  what  would  otherwise  be  kept 


52  LIBER    LIBRORUM. 

from  us,  because  unattainable  by  the  human  mind  apart 
from  this  method  of  communication. 

The  precise  extent  of  its  teaching ;  the  value  of  the 
information  it  imparts;  the  limits  within  which  the 
Book  may  be  regarded  as  infallible ;  and  the  process  by 
which  what  is  Divine  in  it  may  be  separated  from  that 
which  is  human,  will  come  under  our  notice  in  due  time. 
That  it  has  a  human  aspect  no  one  attempts  to  deny ; 
that  it  reveals  chiefly  '  through  the  relations  of  ordinary 
daily  life ;'  that  it  comes  to  us  '  sometimes  intermingled 
with  the  private  histories  and  varying  fortunes  of  an 
Eastern  people,'  is  as  certain  as  that  it  was  given  '  at 
sundry  times  and  in  divers  manners;'  but  the  Book  is 
not  on  these  accounts  the  less  a  revelation,  nor  is  it,  as  a 
consequence,  in  any  degree  unadapted  either  to  our 
nature  or  necessities. 

IxspiRATiox  is  that  process  by  which  God,  for  an 
end^  not  only  communicates  to  certain  men  facts  or 
truths,  the  knowledge  of  which  could  not  be  attained  in 
any  other  way ;  but  also  the  ability  to  teach  to  others, 
without  error  or  defect,  the  truths  thus  revealed.  In- 
spiration, therefore,  properly  so  called,  implies  both 
reception  and  utterance,  the  capacity  to  receive,  and  the 
power  to  communicate  Divine  truth  authoritatively  and 
infallibly.  That  which  is  not  infallibly  true  cannot  be  a 
revelation  from  God.  That  which  is  not  communicated 
to  man  without  any  admixture  of  error  cannot,  properly 
speaking,  be  the  word  of  the  Heavenly  Father. 

By  an  inspired  max",  then,  we  understand  one  who  has 
received,  by  a  direct  inbreathing  of  light  and  truth  from 
God,  a  tnessage  to  others ;  a  commission  involving  an 
obligation,   sometimes  to   speak,  sometimes   to   write, 


REVELATION    AND   INSPIRATION.  53 

sometimes,  under  providential  guidance,  to  record  faith- 
fully, although  not  always  without  liability  to  error,  a 
fact,  or  conversation,  or  discourse ;  sometimes,  under 
like  conditions,  to  narrate  a  history  ;  sometimes  to  com- 
pile and  edit  existing  documents  ;  sometimes,  by  direct 
inspiration,  to  write  letters ;  and  sometimes  to  predict 
future  events. 

In  the  execution  of  such  tasks,  infallihilitij  will  doubt- 
less belong  to  all  that  has  been  directly  revealed  from 
above;  to  all  prediction  founded  thereupon,  and  to  all 
that  is  communicated  by  special  command  ;  but  not  by 
any  meims  of  necessity  to  everything  that  has  thus 
providentially  been  preserved  from  oblivion. 

The  person  so  commissioned  may  thoroughly  compre- 
hend his  own  words,  or  he  may  have  the  depth  of  mean- 
ing involved  in  his  utterances  concealed  from  him.  He 
may,  like  Luke,  write  only  because  '  many  having  taken 
in  hand  to  set  forth  in  order  a  declaration  of  things 
surely  believed,'  it  'seemed  good,'  to  him  to  write  also ; 
or,  like  Daniel,  he  may  record  words  respecting  which 
he  is  obliged  to  say,  '  I  heard,  but  I  understood  not.' 
He  may,  like  Paul  on  one  occasion,  feel  that  he  speaks 
*by  permission,'  and  not  by  commandment;  oi',  like  the 
same  apostle  at  another  time,  he  may  claim  to  express 
himself  'not  in  the  words  which  man's  wisdom  teacheth, 
but  which  the  Holy  Ghost  teacheth.'  He  may  speak 
with  authority,  and  demand  audience  as  a  messenger  of 
God  ;  or  he  may  beseech  and  entreat,  as  a  fellow-sufferer, 
tliat  his  words  may  be  received  with  a  loving  heart, 
since  love  alone  moves  him  to  utter  them.  He  may  be 
altogether  unconscious  that  he  is  writing  for  all  time, 
foreseeing  the  wants  of  all  generations,  and  supplying 


^4  LIBEE   LIBRORUM. 

the  Church  with  spiritual  nourishment  for  two  thousand 
years ;  or  he  may  have  some  slight  and  dim  intimation 
that  this  is  the  case. 

Let  these  things,  however,  be  as  they  may,  it  is  indis- 
putable that,  if  inspired  in  this  high  sense,  the  man  is 
gifted  with  all  that  is  requisite  to  enable  him  to  execute 
the  Divine  commission  faithfully ;  which  he  can  of  course 
only  do  by  receiving  from  Him  who  gave  it  such  light 
as  may  be  needful  to  enlighten  others — such  supernatu- 
ral guidance  as  may  be  required  to  preserve  him  from 
important  error.  So  far  as  the  apostles  were  concerned, 
this  sort  of  help  seems  to  have  been  directly  promised 
to  them  by  the  Saviour,  when,  speaking  of  '  the  Com- 
forter'  that  was  to  come,  He  says,  'He  shall  guide  you 
into  all  truth.  He  shall  bring  all  things  to  your  remem- 
brance whatsoever  I  have  spoken  unto  you.' 

The  loay  in  which  this  may  be  accomplished  is  no 
concern  of  ours.  To  what  extent  such  men  unite  with 
the  Divine  revealer;  how  far  they  themselves  accurately 
understand  that  which  they  communicate  to  others;  or 
how  far  they  are  merely  passive  instruments  in  the 
hands  of  God,  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  know,  nor  is  it 
of  any  moment  that  we  should  have  an  opinion  on  the 
subject.  What  we  want  to  ascertain  is,  not  hoio  apos- 
tles or  prophets  received  that  which  they  have  recorded, 
but  whether  that  which  they  say  is  their  own  or  God's  ? 
whether  it  is  merely  a  human  judgment,  or  a  Divine  and 
therefore  authoritative  message  ? 

A  Book  is  inspired,  just  to  the  extent  that  it  contains 
knowledge  which  has  been  superuaturally  communicated 
for  ends  which  could  not  otherwise  have  been  attained. 
If,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Bible,  the  communication  has 


REVELATION    AND    INSPIRATION.  55 

been  made  to  men  who  lived  ages  ago,  the  book,  or 
rather  those  portions  of  it  which  embody  the  divine 
revelation,  is  authoritative  and  unquestionable  only  to 
the  extent  that  the  original  text  has  been  preserved  and 
faithfully  translated. 

If  it  can  be  shown  that  the  series  of  tracts  which  con- 
stitute the  Bible— wiitten,  as  it  is  admitted  they  have 
been,  by  men  living  at  different  and  far  distant  periods 
—have,  each  and  all  of  them,  from  first  to  last  been  thus 
produced  and  preserved,  then,  as  Mr.  Burgon  asserts,' 
*  every  chapter,  every  verse,  every  word,  every  syllable 
of  it'  may  be  regarded  as  'the  direct  utterance  of  the 
Most  High,'  but  not  otherwise.  Dr.  Carson,  reviewino- 
a  volume  on  the  evidences  by  the  late  Daniel  Wilson, 
Bishop  of  Calcutta,  takes  this  ground  and  says,  *It 
requires  as  much  inspiration  to  tell  what  o'clock  it  is  by 
inspiration,  as  to  reveal  the  Gospel  itself.'  If  all  Scrip- 
ture, he  adds,  is  given  by  inspiration,  '  the  reference  to 
Paul's  cloak  requires  as  much  inspiration  as  those  pas- 
sages that  declare  the  way  of  salvation.' 

This,  however,  is  mere  folly,  since  Paul  obviously 
neither  needed  nor  enjoyed  any  help  from  above,  either 
in  expressing  his  wish  that  the  parchments  should  be 
sent,  or  in  any  other  matter  relating  to  his  personal 
wants  or  wishes.  We  may  be  well  assured  '  the  Divine 
Being  does  not  resort  to  miracle  without  occasion  or  be- 
yond occasion!' 

All  this  may  freely  be  allowed  without  at  all  shaking 

^  Inspiration  and  Interpretation :  seven  Sermons  before  the  Uni- 
versity of  Oxford.  By  the  Rev.  J.  W.  Burgon,  M.  A.,  Fellow  of 
Oriel  CoUcge.  So,  in  effect,  Gaussen,  Haldane,  Dr.  Candlish,  and 
others. 


56  LIBER   LLBRORUM. 

the  foundation  on  which  we  rest  the  assertion,  that  the 
Bible  is  inspired  in  a  sense  exceptional  enough  to  re- 
move it  out  of  the  rank  of  even  the  highest  of  merely 
human  compositions.  For  if  its  teachings  be  only  the 
words  of  men  so  purified  and  morally  elevated  that 
their  instructions  are  weightier,  more  Godlike,  more 
profitable  than  those  of  other  men ;  if  they  who  speak 
or  write  have  not  received  that  which  they  tell  us  is  from 
God,  as  a  message  to  be  delivered^  they  have  not  been 
inspired  at  all,  in  the  only  sense  which  ought  to  be 
attached  to  that  word  when  we  connect  it  with  Holy 
Scripture. 

It  has  already  been  said  that  we  have  nothing  what- 
ever to  do  with  the  mode  in  which  inspired  men  may  be 
supposed  to  have  received  the  Divine  gift.  Perhaps  we 
have  as  little  concern  with  the  precise  form  in  which 
they  embody  the  thought  that  has  been  given  them ; 
whether  it  be  in  prose  or  poetry,  in  narrative  or  in 
epistle,  in  parable  or  in  lengthened  discourse.  All  that 
we  want  to  be  assured  of  is,  that  certain  teaching  may 
reasonably  be  confided  in  as  Divine,  and  therefore  infal- 
lible— that  it  is,  in  short,  pure  truth,  without  error  or 
alloy.  If  this  assurance  cannot  be  had,  it  is  but  folly 
to  attach  the  importance  to  the  Bible  we  do,  or  to  seek 
guidance  of  men  who  lived  and  died  eighteen  hundred 
years  ago,  rather  than  in  the  highest  spiritual  intuitions 
of  our  own  souls. 

Tlie  great  question  then  arises,  whether  the  Divine 
authority  claimed  in  the  Bible  for  proj^hets  and  apostles 
should  be  extended  to  all  that  is  recorded  in  Scripture ; 
whether  we  ought  to  affirm  of '  the  Book '  that  it  is  from 
first  to  last,  and  in  all  parts,  'the  Word  of  God;'  or 


REVELATION   AND   INSPIRATION.  67 

whether  we  should  be  content  with  the  assertion  that  it 
contains  and  embodies  that  Word.  If  the  former  view 
be  correct,  it  is  infallible  throughout.  If  the  latter,  its 
infallibility  must  be  limited  to  certain  portions.  We 
shall  find  the  enquiry  both  interesting  and  important. 
Let  us  not  be  afraid  of  it. 

For  the  present,  it  is  assumed  that  inspiration,  and 
therefore  infallibility,  does  not  belong  to  the  entire 
book ;  and,  further,  that  a  principle  may  be  found  by 
the  application  of  which  that  which  is  inspired  may  be 
distinguished  from  that  which  is  not. 
3* 


CHAPTER    II. 

THE    EXTEXT    OF   THE    CLAIM. 

"We  have  now  to  enquire  what,  in  relation  to  its  in- 
spiration, the  Bible  says  of  itself.  Does  it,  or  does  it 
not,  affirm  that  everything  contained  in  the  volume  as 
it  stands  is  inspired,  and  therefore  infallible? 

The  first  passage  that  will  probably  suggest  itself  in 
this  connection  to  most  persons,  is  found  in  St.  Paul's 
second  epistle  to  Timothy  (iii.  16,  17):  'All  Scripture 
is  given  by  inspiration  of  God,  and  is  profitable  for 
doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruction  in 
righteousness:  that  the  man  of  God  may  be  perfect, 
throughly  furnished  unto  all  good  works.'  So  the 
words  stand  in  our  authorized  version,  and  the  text,  as 
is  well  known,  is  often  claimed  as  positively  asserting 
that  everything  contained,  whether  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment or  in  the  New,  is  inspired  of  God. 

But  does  the  writer  affirm  this  ?  Clearly,  not  at  all ; 
for  at  the  time  Paul  wrote,  no  such  book  as  the  New 
Testament  was  in  existence.  He  could  therefore  only 
refer  to  the  Old.  Further,  the  words  of  the  apostle  as 
given  in  our  version  are  not  the  words  he  used.  Paul 
does  not  say  that  all  Scripture  (whatever  may  be  in- 
cluded under  that  designation)  is  given  by  inspiration 
or  '  God-breathed,'  but  that  all  Divinely  insjnred  Scrip- 
ture— all  Scripture,  that  is,  from  God — is  also  profit- 


tiip:  extent  of  the  claim.  59 

iible.  (See  Alford,  Ellicott,  Adam  Clarke,  and  Pye 
Smith.) 

The  apostle  had,  in  the  preceding  verse,  been  telling 
his  '  son  Timothy '  that  the  Holy  Scriptures,  with  which 
he  had  been  acquainted  from  his  childhood,  were  able 
to  make  him  wise  unto  salvation  through  faith  in  Christ, 
and  he  now  adds,  'AH  Scripture  given  by  inspiration  of 
God  is  pvo^tsihle /o7' the  perfection  of  character.^  To 
suppose  that  he  here  means  to  affirm  that  the  catalogue 
of  the  Dukes  of  Edom,  given  us  in  the  first  book  of 
Chronicles,  are  to  be  placed  side  by  side  with  the  pro- 
phecies of  Isaiah  or  the  utterances  of  the  Psalms,  that 
both  are  '  God-breathed '  and  alike  given  '  that  the  man 
of  God  maybe  perfect,'  surely  savours  far  more  of  super- 
stition than  of  piety. 

Nor  is  this  all.  For  the  supposition  that  the  apostle 
intended  to  say  that  all  Scripture  (meaning  thereby  all 
that  was  then  embodied  in  the  Septuagint,/rom  tohich 
he  hahitually  quotes)  was  given  by  inspiration  of  God, 
is  to  make  him  assert  the  inspiration  of  the  Apocrypha, 
for  there  is  qyqyj  reason  to  suppose  that  some  at  least 
of  the  books  now  known  as  apocryphal  were,  even  in 
his  day,  included  in  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures.^     It 


^  The  books  thus  found  in  the  Septuagint  version  were  not, 
indeed,  in  the  Hebrew  text,  nor  in  the  canon  acknowledged  by  the 
Jews  of  Palestine ;  but  '  they  were  recognised  by  the  Hellenistic 
Jews,  and,  therefore,  by  the  men  with  whom  Paul  came  more  im- 
mediately into  contact.'  In  Clement  of  Alexandria,  in  Origen  and 
Athanasius,  we  find  citations  from  the  books  of  the  present  Apo- 
crypha as  '  Scripture,'  '  Divine  Scripture,'  and  '  Prophecy.'  Augus- 
tine admitted  several  apocryphal  books.  It  was  reserved  for  the 
age  of  the  Reformation  to  stamp  the  word  *  apocrypha '  with  its 


60  LIBEE   LIBEOKUM. 

is  generally  supposed  that  these  books  obtained  a  place 
in  the  Greek  Scriptures  about  one  hundred  and  thirty 
years  before  Christ.  '  The  only  copies  of  the  Scriptures 
in  existence  for  the  first  three  hundred  years  after  Christ, 
either  among  the  Jews  or  Christians  of  Greece,  Italy, 
or  Afi-ica,  contained  these  books  Avithout  any  mark  of 
distinction  that  we  know  of.  Origen,  at  great  length, 
vindicates  these  parts  of  the  Greek  version,  asserting 
that  they  were  true  and  genuine,  and  made  use  of  in 
Greek  among  all  the  churches  of  the  Gentiles,  and  that 
we  should  not  attend  to  the  fraudulent  comments  of  the 
Jews,  but  take  that  only  for  true,  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, which  the  seventy  had  translated,  for  that  this 
only  was  confirmed  by  apostolic  authority."  The  ab- 
sence of  any  hst  of  inspired  books  in  the  writings  of  the 
apostle,  and  the  fact  that  he  commonly  quotes  from  the 
Greek  Septuagint  without  remark,  certainly  favours  the 
opinion  tliat  St.  Paul  did  not  intend  to  say  that  every 
writing  then  regarded  as  Scripture  was  inspired. 

Other  statements  made  by  Paul,  by  his  brother  apos- 
tles, and  by  Christ  Himself,  confirm  us  in  the  propriety 


present  signification.  (Rev.  E.  H.  Plumptre,  in  Smith's  Dictionary, 
art.  'Apocrypha.') 

'  The  absolute  infallibility  of  the  sacred  books  throughout  was  set 
up  by  Protestantism  as  a  counterpoise  to  the  infallible  authority 
asserted  and  claimed  by  the  Romish  Church.  Protestantism  sought 
to  recover,  hy  means  of  the  outwardly  authoritative  and  entire  infaUi- 
biliiy  of  books,  wliat  it  had  lost  by  rejecting  inspired  councils  and 
popish  infallibiUty.'  (Tholuck,  quoted  in  Davidson's  Introduction, 
p.  372.) 

^  Kitto's  Bib.  Cycl.  by  Dr.  Alexander ;  art.  '  Apocrypha,'  by  Dr. 
Wright. 


THE   EXTENT   OF    THE   CLAIM.  61 

of  limiting  infallibility  to  portions  of  the  Bible.  The 
following  may  be  quoted :  '  Prophecy  came  not  in  old 
time  by  the  will  of  man ;  but  holy  men  of  God  spake  as 
they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost'  (2  Peter  i.  21). 
'  God  who  in  sundry  times  and  divers  manners  spake  in 
time  past  unto  the  fathers  hy  the  prophets''  (Heb.  i.  1). 
Paul  speaks  of  the  faith  of  the  Ephesians  as  '  built  on 
the  foundation  oi  the  apostles  and  prophets''  (Eph.  ii.  20). 
It  may  not,  indeed,  be  argued  f/om  these  passages  that 
inspiration  is  to  be  confined  to  the  writings  of  the 
prophets ;  but  it  is  surely  worth  notice,  that  in  Scrip- 
ture prophecy  is  specially  marked  out  as  given  by 
inspiration.  Attach  to  the  word  '  prophecy '  the  mean- 
ing it  always  has  in  the  Bible,  viz.,  not  that  of  predic- 
tion merely,  but  all  Divine  utterances,  and  it  is  found  to 
be  only  another  phrase  for  '  the  oracles  of  God '  (Ro- 
mans iii.  2) ;  for  the  'lively  oracles'  (Acts  vii.  38) ;  for 
the  holy  writings  [ypacpatc;  dyiaiq)  (Romans  i.  2)  ;  for  the 
sacred  letters  (ra  Ufjd  ypdiximza)  (2  Tim.  iii.  15) ;  and  for 
'  every  word  that  proceedeth  out  of  the  mouth  of  God ' 
(Matt.  iv.  4). 

That  Holy  Scripture  is  not  unfroquently  limited  by 
Christ  Himself  seems  clear.  Pie  sometimes  speaks  of  it 
as  if  it  were  confined  to  'Moses  and  the  prophets' 
(Luke  xvi.  29-31) — that  is,  to  the  revealed  law  of  God 
whether  given  by  Moses  or  by  later  inspired  teachers. 
After  the  resurrection,  we  find  Him  expounding  as 
Divine  '  all  things  written  in  the  law  of  Jfoses,  and  in 
the  prophets^  and  in  the  Psalms  concer7iing  Himself 
(Luke  xxiv.  44) ;  but  in  no  part  of  the  Lord's  teaching 
can  there  be  found  a  word  to  justify  the  assertion  that 
everything    contained    in    the    Old    Testament    from 


62  LIBEK   LIBKOEUM, 

Genesis  to  Malachi  ought  to  be   regarded   as   equally 
authoritative  aud  infallible. 

It  has,  indeed,  been  maintained  that  in  the  words 
just  quoted  Christ  refers  to  the  three  great  divisions 
under  which,  it  is  supposed,  the  Old  Testament  writings 
were  then  classed.  But  there  is  no  evidence  whatever 
of  this.  To  speak  of  the  law  of  Moses,  of  the  pro- 
phets, and  of  the  Psalms,  as  containing  predictions 
regarding  Himself,  is  ^rely  a  very  dilFerent  thing  from 
asserting  that  the  law,  the  prophecies,  and  the  remain- 
der of  the  books  are  integral  sections  of  a  completed 
whole.  As  reasonable  would  it  be  to  affirm  that  Paul 
taught  this  triple  division  of  a  complete  volume,  when 
he  tells  us  that  he  persuaded  the  Jews  '  concerning  Jesus, 
both  out  of  the  law  of  Moses  and  out  of  the  prophets.' 
The  triple  division  is  indeed  '  very  ancient ;  but  it  is 
difficult  to  say  what  were  included  under  each  of  these 
heads.  There  was  no  fixed  and  unalterable  arrange- 
ment of  the  sacred  books  as  that  which  is  commonly 
assumed  anterior  to  the  fifth  century  of  the  Christian 
era.'^  To  rest  a  claim  for  the  inspiration  of  the 
entire  volume  on  such  a  basis  as  this,  is  weakness 
indeed.  Equally  unwise  is  it  to  conclude,  without  any 
good  reason  for  so  doing,  that  every  book  must  be 
inspired  from  which  Christ  or  His  apostles  quoted, 
especially  when  it  is  remembered  that  non-quotation 
from  any  book  of  Scripture  is  never  regarded  as  fatal 
to  its  authority,  and  while  other  books  referred  to,  like 
that  of  '  Enoch,'  are  now  imknown.  Such  passages  as 
*  Thou  hast  magnified  Thy  word  above  all  Thy  name ' 
evidently  do  not  refer  to  the  Bible  as  a  book. 

^  Kitto's  Bib.  Cycl.,  art.  'Canon, 'by  Dr.  Alexander. 


THE   EXTENT    OF   THE    CLAIM.  63 

Specific  assertions  of  inspiration  are  indeed  not  un- 
frequently  put  forth ;  but  none  of  these  apply  to  the 
whole  volume.     The  following  may  be  cited  : — 

1.  There  is  a  claim  on  behalf  of  the  Divine  character 
of  the  Mosaic  tabernacle  services,  in  the  words,  '  The 
Holy  Ghost  this  signify uig''  (Heb.  ix.  8).  Also  a  very 
distinct  one  on  behalf  of  the  direct  commiuiications  made 
to  Moses  by  God:  'Have  ye  not  read  that  which  was 
spoken  unto  you  by  GocV  (Matt.  xxii.  31  referring  to 
Exod.  iii.  6). 

2.  For  the  inspiration  of  the  prophets  who  spake 
beforehand  of  Christ :  '  Searching  what  or  what  manner 
of  time  the  Spirit  of  Christ  which  loas  in  them  did  sig- 
nify'  (1  Pet.  i.  11).  And  again:  '  Prophecy  came  not 
in  old  time  by  the  will  of  man :  but  holy  men  of  God 
spake  as  they  loere  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost '  (2  Petl 
i.  21).  And  again:  'Those  things  which  God  before 
had  showed  by  the  mouth  of  all  His  prophets'  (Acts 
iii.  18). 

3.  For  David :  '  Which  the  Holy  Ghost  hy  the  mouth 
of  David  spake'  (Acts  i.  16;  iv.  25).  For  Isaiah: 
'  Well  spake  the  Holy  Ghost  by  Esaias  the  proj^het ' 
(Acts  xxviii.  25).  For  Jeremiah :  '  Whereof  the  Holy 
Ghost  said^  (Heb.  x.  15). 

4.  Under  given  circumstances  for  the  apostles  gene- 
rally :  'It  is  not  ye  that  speak,  but  the  Holy  Ghost"* 
(Mark  xiii.  11.)  Paul  makes  it  for  himself,  when  he 
commends  the  Thessalonians  for  receiving  his  teaching* 
not  as  his,  but  'as  it  is  in  truth  the  Word  of  God"^ 
(1  Thess.  ii.  13).  Elsewhere  he  says,  '  We  speak  not 
in  the  words  which  man's  wisdom  teacheth,  but  which 
the  Holy  Ghost  teacheth'  (1  Cor.  ii.  13).     John,  in  the 


64  LIBEK   LIBEOEUM. 

Apocalypse,  distinctly  affirms  that  what  he  reveals  was 
'  sent  and  signified '  to  him  by  Christ  (Rev.  i.  1). 

It  is  not  of  course  pretended  that  only  those  writers 
are  inspired  for  whom  this  special  claim  is  made ;  but 
it  is  surely  singular  that  while  inspii-ation  is  affirmed 
(jenerally  of  prophets  and  apostles,  and  specially  of 
some,  it  is  nowhere  claimed  either  generally  or  spe- 
cially for  historians,  or  for  the  entire  volume  of  Scrip- 
ture. Everything,  indeed,  indicates  that  the  claim  of 
inspiration,  and  therefore  of  infallibility,  is  limited  to 
those  portions  of  the  Bible  which  are  revelations  from 
heaven,  or  essential  to  their  comprehension. 

Under  the  head,  then,  of  inspired  Scripture  may  be 
classed  all  that  we  are  told  of  God  beyond  what  may  be 
gathered  from  His  Works  and  Providential  government 
of  the  world ;  all  the  information  we  have  as  to  our  future 
destiny ;  every  prophetic  intimation  ;  every  elevating 
and  purifying  truth  which  man  could  not  otherwise 
reach.  From  it  may  be  excluded  without  irreverence 
the  merely  historical,  however  true  and  iisefid\  gene- 
alogies however  important  in  their  place;  poems  or 
proverbs  hoivever  wise,  which  are  but  expressions  of 
human  experience ;  references  to  physical  phenomena 
ordinarily  expressed  in  colloquial  language ;  and  all 
acts  or  utterances  which  are  not  in  accordance  with  the 
spirit  and  temper  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  There  are  such  in 
the  Old  Testament ;  and  as  these,  however  needful  to  a 
true  delineation  of  men  and  times,  are  not  in  themselves 
intended  for  our  imitation,  and  have  no  tendency  '  to 
make  the  man  of  God  perfect,'  it  is  not  presumptuous 
to  say  that,  whatever  may  be  their  value,  they  are  but 
records  of  human  infirmity.     Nor  is  it  any  answer  to 


THE    EXTENT   OF   THE   CLAIM.  (J5 

reply  that  from  all  these  portions  a  devout  mind  can 
gain  instruction,  for  by  such  a  mind  '  sermons '  may  be 
found  *  in  stones ;'  but  this  does  not  make  the  stones 
inspired. 

The  distinction  is  not  a  novel  one ;  it  has  been  urged 
by  some  of  the  ablest  and  best  divines  the  Church  has 
produced.* 

We  have  said  that  inspiration,  whether  verbal  or 
otherwise,  implies  the  power  of  communicating  the 
message  received  from  God  without  error  or  mistake ; 
it  may  also  be  understood  to  include  the  ahility  to  nar- 
rate exactly  as  they  happened  all  occurrences  and  con- 
versations in  ichich  absolute  accuracy  was  requisite^  and 
to  select,  without  failure  of  judgment,  such  written 
memorials  as  it  seemed  good  to  Divine  Providence  to 
perpetuate  for  the  use  of  the  Church.  But  it  by  no 
means  follows  that  two  inspired  men  must  therefore 
necessarily  narrate  events  in  the  same  words,  or  pre- 
cisely in  the  same  order;  nor  does  such  aid  either  in- 
volve the  Divine  sanction  of  every  act  thus  recorded, 
or  give  a  character  of  Divine  truthfulness  to  every  his- 
tory and  genealogy  that  may  be  inserted.  Further, 
where  communications  such  as  those  embodied  in  the 
Bible,  have  been  recorded  by  men  who  lived  ages  ago, 
we  must  have  some  evidence  that  the  books  containing 
them  have  been  carefully  preserved.  This  we  certainly 
have. 

The  preservation  of  the  Old  Testament  by  the  Jew 
— considering  what  it  contains — through  thousands 
of  years,  obviously  implies  a  Providential   care  of  it, 

*  See  Appendix,  Note  A.     '  Eminent  Witnesses.' 


(j6  libek  lieeoeum. 

scarcely  less  Divine  than  that  which  originally  attended 
its  formation.  Accuracy  in  translation  being  within 
the  reach  of  human  industry,  has,  for  that  reason,  been 
left  to  be  secured  by  the  unaided  energies  of  man. 

And  this  leads  us  to  the  consideration  oi  certain  facts 
relating  to  the  Bible,  which  plainly  come  under  our 
cognizance,  and  which  certainly  make  against  the  sup- 
position that  everything  in  the  book  is  Divinely  in- 
spired, and  therefore  infallible,  since  they  show  that 
the  Bible  has  not  been  preserved  from  the  accidents 
which  are  inseparable  from  the  transmission  of  ancient 
documents  through  the  ages.  On  the  contrary,  it  is 
certain  that  while,  as  a  whole,  the  book  has  been 
remarkably  cared  for,  it  contains,  in  matters  compara- 
tively unimportant,  not  a  few  errors  and  some  positive 
contradictions.  These  can  only  be  accounted  for  on  one 
of  two  suppositions:  either  that  the  writers  were  not 
in  these  particulars  Divinely  inspired  and  so  preserved 
from  the  possibility  of  error,  or  that  the  Book  itself  has, 
at  a  later  period,  been  exposed  sometimes  to  wilful  in- 
terpolation, and  sometimes  to  clerkly  inaccuracy. 

We  take  no  notice  here  of  alleged  contradictions 
between  prophecies  and  their  fulfilment,  or  of  apparent 
discrepancies  in  doctrine ;  for  these,  whether  real  or 
unreal — and  we  think  them,  for  the  most  part,  unreal — 
would  lead  us  on  to  debateable  ground.  We  wish 
simply  to  deal  with  facts  which  no  one  can  dispute; 
and  therefore  only  bring  forward  inaccuracies  that  are 
obvious  at  a  glance.  The  following  instances  will  suffice 
to  show  what  is  meant. 

'  In  the  twenty-second  chapter  of  the  second  book  of 
Chronicles  "  forty-two  years  "  ought  to  be  twenty -two. 


THE   EXTENT   OF   THE   CLAIIVI.  67 

This  is  evident  wlien  the  passage  is  compared  with  the 
second  book  of  Kings  (viii.  26).  Again,  in  the  second 
book  of  Samuel  (viii.  4),  David  is  said  to  have  taken 
from  Hadadezer  *'  seA''en  hundred  horsemen."  In  the 
first  of  Chronicles  (xviii.  4)  the  number  is  said  to  have 
been  "  seven  thousand  horsemen."  In  the  book  of 
Numbers,  "  those  that  died  in  the  plague  "  (on  account 
of  Baal  Peor)  are  said  to  have  been  "  twenty  and  four 
thousand,"  while  in  the  first  of  Corinthians  (x.  8)  it  is 
said,  in  relation  to  the  same  event,  there  fell  in  one  day 
three  and  twenty  thousand.' 

With  regard  to  the  numbering  of  the  people  mistakes 
are  numerous.  E.  g. :  According  to  Samuel  (2  Sam. 
xxiv.  9),  JoaVs  report  to  David  after  the  census  is 
'eight  hundred  thousand'  fighting  men  of  Israel,  and 
'five  hundred  thousand'  of  Judah.  In  the  first  of 
Chronicles  (xxi.  5)  the  same  report  is  said  to  have  been 
'-eleven  hundred  thousand'  of  Israel,  and  'four  hundred 
and  seventy  thousand'  of  Judah.  In  the  first  of  Kings 
(xv.  5)  we  are  told  that  David  (as  monarch)  never 
deviated  from  the  right  '  save  in  the  matter  of  Uriah  the 
Hittite,'  yet  we  know  that  he  sinned  in  numbering  the 
})eople,  and  was  punished  for  it.  Further,  in  relation  to 
this  very  punishment,  it  is  said  in  the  second  of  Samuel 
(xxiv.  13)  that  the  prophet  Gad  came  to  David  and 
said  to  him,  'Shall  seven  years  of  famine  come  unto 
thee  in  thy  land?'  while  in  the  first  of  Chronicles  (xxi. 
11-12)  we  read,  '  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  Choose  thee  either 
tJtrce  years  of  famine.'  To  keep  to  the  same  event — in 
the  second  of  Samuel  (xxiv.  24)  David,  we  are  told, 
paid  for  the  threshing  floor  over  which  the  plague 
stopped  'fifty  shekels  of  silver.'     In  the  first  of  Chron- 


68  LIBER   LIBEORUM. 

icles  (xxi.  25)  the  price  paid  is  said  to  have  been  '  six 
hundred  shekels  oi  gold.'' 

That  some  of  these  apparent  contradictions  may  be 
explained  by  the  mistakes  of  transcribers  as  to  letters 
used  to  express  numeral  pOAvers,  or  by  the  accidental 
addition  or  omission  of  a  cipher,  is  probable  enough  ; 
but  let  that  be  as  it  may,  it  is  as  certain  that  they  exist, 
as  it  is  that  they  relate  only  to  matters  of  detail,  and 
have  no  bearing  whatever  on  moral  or  religious  truth. 
To  deny  these  discrepancies,  or  to  explain  them  away  in 
an  unsatisfactory  manner,  is  only  to  confirm  unbelievers 
in  their  incredulity.  To  shut  one's  eyes  to  them  is 
mere  stupiaity.  It  is  to  say  in  effect  that  if  we  refuse 
to  see  a  fact  we  shall  not  come  into  collision  with  it, 
which  is  simply  as  untrue  as  it  is  absurd.  As  the  Bishop 
of  London  has  well  remarked  :  '  When  laborious  inge- 
nuity has  exerted  itself  to  collect  a  whole  store  of  such 
difficulties,  supposing  them  to  be  real,  what  on  earth 
does  it  signify  ?  They  may  quietly  float  away  without 
our  being  able  to  solve  them,  if  we  bear  in  mind  the 
acknowledged  fact  that  there  is  a  human  element  in 
the  Bible.' 

They  are,  however,  certainly  fatal  to  those  who  assert 
that  '  not  only  is  the  Word  of  God  in  the  Bible,  but  the 
Bible  is  itself,  in  the  strictest  and  fullest  sense,  in  every 
particular  of  its  contents,  and  in  every  expression  which 
it  uses,  the  infallible  word  of  the  one  living  and  true 
God.'  Just  as,  in  like  manner,  the  voice  of  the  rocks 
must  eventually  cover  with  confusion  all  who  are  unwise 
enough  to  say  that  '  the  Bible  could  not  reveal  spiritual 
truth  infallibly,  unless  it  were  infallible  also  in  all  that 
it  says  about  physical  truth;  in  other  words,  that  all  its 


THE  EXTENT  OF  THE  CLATM.  69 

references  to  physical  truths  must  bo  true,  God  beinc;, 
if  without  offence  it  may  be  thus  spoken,  responsible 
for  them.'  This  ground  is  taken  by  Mr.  Burgon,  Dr. 
Candlish,  and  others. 

But  the  fact  is,  Scripture  nowhere  puts  forward  any 
such  claim.  If  it  did  it  would  be  a  thing  of '  the  letter  ' 
rather  than  of  '  the  spirit,'  and  the  least  flaw  in  expies- 
sion  would  be  fatal  to  its  pretensions.  Again,  if  inspira- 
tion were  in  the  letter,  it  is  not  easy  to  see  how  the  book 
could  be  translated  without  being  destroyed  :  whereas, 
as  a  fact,  it  passes  into  every  tongue,  and  is,  when  faith- 
fully rendered,  quite  as  much  the  Word  of  God  in  one 
language  as  in  another.  Further,  the  apostles  not  un- 
frequently  quote  the  sense  of  a  passage  rather  than  its 
exact  words ;  in  this,  as  in  other  ways,  leaving  the  hn- 
pression  that  the  infallible  Word  of  God  is  to  be  found 
only  in  that  body  of  doctrine,  whether  prophetic  or 
preceptive,  which  they  had  received  from  above ;  con- 
nected, indeed.,  but  not  to  be  confounded,  with  the  his- 
tory of  their  nation,  the  character  of  their  literature,  or 
the  experience  of  their  lives. 

On  the  other  hand,  to  concede  the  fact  that  the  sacred 
writers  were  only  inspired  to  teach  Dunne  truth.,  and 
that  in  other  matters  they  are  left  to  their  natural  facul- 
ties as  honest  witnesses,  far  from  weakening  the  cause 
of  Scripture,  goes  directly  to  deprive  the  objector  of 
his  most  dangerous  weapon.  'The  spiritual  element  in 
Scripture — that  is,  everything  in  it  which  concerns  our 
relation  to  God  and  to  eternity — tnough  combined  with 
other  elements,  is  plainly  distinguishable  from  then)^ 
and  wholly  independent  of  them  ;  and  since  the  evi- 
dence of  Christianity  attaches  infallibility  only  to  the 


VO  LIBER   LIBROKTJM. 

spiritual  element,  the  discovery  of  errors  in  the  Bible 
does  not  toucli  Christianity  at  all.'  ^ 

That  the  structure  of  the.  Bible,  the  marvellous  unity 
which  subsists  between  all  its  parts — the  reverberation, 
so  to  speak,  of  one  great  truth  through  all  its  pages, 
from  Genesis  to  the  Apocalypse — aifords  strong  ground 
for  believing  that  its  production,  as  a  whole^  is,  in  a  cer- 
tain sense,  the  work  of  the  Divine  mind,  providentially 
guiding  each  writer,  compiler,  or  editor,  to  one  great 
end,  we  are  far  from  disputing ;  but  this  fact,  while  it 
most  clearly  and  distinctly  separates  the  Book  from  all 
mere  human  compositions,  and  while  it  should  guard  us 
against  the  folly  implied  in  asserting  that  this  or  that 
is  superfluous,  by  no  means  proves  that  everything  it 
contains  is  divinely  inspired,  and  therefore  infallibly 
true,  or  that  i7i  all  its  parts  it  is  'profitable  for  doctrine, 
for  reproof,  for  correction,  or  for  instruction  in  right- 
eousness.' The  treasure  is  in  earthen  vessels  in  more 
senses  than .  one,  and  this  simply  because  it  is  on  the 
whole  best  that  it  should  be  so. 

Yet  it  should  not  be  forgotten  that  while,  as  a  rule, 
truth  revealed  by  God  to  man  is  to  be  found  in  the  spirit 
rather  than  in  the  letter,  for  Divine  thoughts  are  always 
*  Spirit  and  Life,'  the  literal  cannot  always  be  dispensed 
with.  The  prophecies  which  declare  at  once  the  great- 
ness and  the  lowliness  of  Messiah  were  evidently 
intended  to  be  understood  literally,  so  many  of  them 
having  been  literalli/ fnl^Wed.  ii  prophecy,  indeed,  can 
scarcely  be  said  to  be  fulfilled  at  all  which  is  not,  to 
some  extent  at  least,  fulfilled  to  the  letter.  If  God  did 
not  literally  '  bring  a  flood  of  waters  upon  the  earth  to 

J  Byrne's  Donnellan  Lectures  before  the  University  of  Dublin. 


THE    EXTENT   OF   THE    CLAIM.  71 

destroy  all  flesh  wherein  is  the  breath  of  life  from  under 
heaven,'  the  announcement  that  He  would  do  so  is 
untrustworthy.  But  if  He  did,  it  is  comparatively  of 
little  consequence  hoio  the  event  was  brought  about,  or 
whether  the  waters  did  or  did  not  cover  the  whole 
earth. 

Why,  then,  should  we  be  so  anxious  regarding  the 
literal  accuracy,  for  instance,  of  everything  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch ?  Why  should  we  be  troubled  if  we  find  it 
impossible  to  reconcile  the  two  accounts  of  the  creation 
given  in  the  first  and  second  chapters  of  Genesis,  and 
therefore  come  to  the  conclusion  that  it  is  needless  to 
enquire  whether  they  record  the  same  event,  or  whether, 
as  some  suppose,  the  former  relates  to  a  race  that  passed 
away  long  before  Adam  was  born  ?  Why  should  we  be 
at  all  careful  to  decide  whether  the  *  six  days  '  spoken 
of  mean  six  of  our  days,  or  whether  they  represent 
periods  of  long  or  short  duration  ?  whether  the  narra- 
tive of  the  Fall  is  to  be  understood  literally,  or  whether 
it  in  any  degree  involves  allegory  or  other  figure  of 
speech  ?  Why  should  we  be  concerned  to  know 
whether  by  the  terra  '  Sons  of  God '  in  the  sixth  chapter, 
the  pious  descendants  of  Seth  are  meant,  or  whether, 
as  the  late  Dr.  Maitland  has  maintained  in  his  'Eruvin,' 
other  intelligences,  with  whom  we  have  now  no  possi- 
bility of  contact,  are  intended  ?  Why  should  we  even 
stop  to  enquire  within  what  limits  the  entrance  of 
animals  into  the  Ark  is  to  be  confined,  or  yet  whether 
the  Flood  itself  overflowed  the  whole  globe,  or  only 
those  portions  of  it  which  were  then  inhabited  ? 

These  questions  are  not  unimportant.  They  all  have 
their  place  in  Biblical  criticism,  and  they  have  all  been 


72  LIBER   LrBROKUM. 

treated,  if  not  invariably  with  wisdom,  certainly  with 
abundant  learning.  But,  settle  them  as  we  may,  the 
value  of  the  document  out  of  which  they  spring  is 
undiminished.  So  far  as  any  man's  trust  in  the  Bible 
is  concerned,  it  matters  very  little  whether  this  or  that 
portion  of  the  narrative  is  to  be  understood  literally  or 
figuratively.  The  one  sole  question  in  which  he  is 
interested  is  this.  Can  the  record  be  depended  upon  ? 
is  it  essentially  truthful  ? 

Literality  is  certainly  not  in  itself  essential  to  truth- 
fulness. The  parables  of  the  Lord  are  quite  as  true  as 
any  other  parts  of  His  teaching  ;  and  figures  of  speech 
may  sometimes  express  truth  in  all  its  fulness  and  com- 
pleteness, better  than  any  simple  and  literal  statements 
could  do.  The  book  of  Genesis  was  not  written  for 
Englishmen  only,  nor  yet  for  the  men  of  the  nineteenth 
century  alone.  It  has  no  exclusive  message  to  the  prac- 
tical, the  scientific,  the  learned.  It  is  addressed  to  men 
of  all  ages,  of  all  temperaments,  in  all  the  various  stages 
of  civilization  and  of  culture,  and  the  problem  to  be 
solved  in  producing  a  written  account  of  the  origin  of 
the  world  was  this :  How  can  the  information  be  best 
communicated  so  as  to  be  equally  adapted  to  the  con- 
dition and  necessities  of  each  and  all  ?  It  may  be  that 
this  could  be  effected  only  by  divergence  from  the  literal, 
by  the  occasional  use  of  <^  form  of  speech  more  likely  to 
convey  a  true  impression  than  any  plain,  prosaic,  matter 
of  fact  statement  could  possibly  do.  Be  this,  however,  as 
it  may,  the  value  of  the  Bible  is  by  no  nieans  dependent 
on  these  things  ;  and  one  scarcely  knows  which  most  to 
wonder  at — the  malice  which  rejoices  to  declare  that 
the  authority  of  Scripture  is  overthrown  if  a  discrepancy 


TUK    EXTENT    OF    THE    CLAIM.  73 

•  * 

can  be  discovered,  or  the  folly  of  those  Christians  who 
seem  to  stake  Divine  revelation  itself  on  the  verbal 
accuracy  of  either  text  or  translation. 

We  ask  not,  then,  whether  the  '  bow  '  in  heaven  lirst 
became  visible  after  the  Flood,  or  whether,  as  previously 
existing,  it  was  only  appropiiated  as  the  token  of  the 
covenant  made  with  the  earth ;  whether  literally  men 
thought  to  build  a  tower  that  should  reach  unto  heaven, 
or  whether  the  *  city  and  tower '  spoken  of  ought  not 
to  be  regarded  as  a  symbolic  expression  of  the  fact  that 
a  great  ungodly  centralisation  was  now  attempted  ; 
whether  the  confusion  of  tongues,  although  in  the  first 
instance  judicial  and  special,  was,  as  to  its  perpetuation, 
anything  more  or  diiferent  from  that  tendency — per- 
petually manifested  where  no  common  centre  exists,  and 
where  communication  is  infrequent — to  vary  and  corrupt 
a  language  until  it  becomes  absolutely  unintelligible  to 
those  who  once  in  common  terms  expressed  their  wants 
and  wishes. 

None  of  these  questions  need  we  care  to  have  an- 
swered, simply  because,  as  we  have  before  said,  the 
truthfulness  of  the  narrative  does  not  depend  on  its 
literality.  Expound  these  matters  as  we  may,  the  record 
still  stands,  the  only  record  that  can  be  regarded  as 
furnishing  even  a  plausible  account  of  the  world's  history 
prior  to  the  calling  of  Abram^  And  this  is  equally  true 
in  relation  to  the  entire  Pentateuch.  What  does  it 
matter  whether  Moses  was  directly  inspired  to  write 
all  that  is  found  therein,  or  whether  he  was  divinely 
commissioned  to  condense  and  to  correct  fragments  of 
earlier  documents,  and  to  give  shape  to  the  memory  of 
traditions  otherwise  sure  to  pass  away  ?     What  does  it 


74  LIBER   LTBROEUM. 

matter  whether  these  writings  were  or  were  not  at  a 
later  period  re-edited  with  additions?  Of  one  thing  we 
may  be  quite  sure,  viz.  that  Moses  did  not  write  the 
account  of  his  own  death. 

What  if  many  of  the  numbers  given  in  Exodus 
should,  as  Bishop  Colenso  asserts,  be  inaccurate  ?  What 
is  to  be  gained  by  assertions  or  denials  relative  to 
matters  which  have  for  ever  passed  out  of  the  reach  of 
our  verification  ?  What  if,  here  and  there,  a  law  should 
seem  to  us  strange  and  unaccountable  ;  an  event  difficult 
to  comprehend;  a  statement  to  involve  an  apparent 
contradiction  ?  What  has  all  this  to  do  with  the  essential 
value  of  the  Book  ?  Absolutely  nothing  ;  unless  thereby 
its  truthfulness  can  be  set  aside. 

If,  indeed,  Moses  never  existed,  being  only  a  myth ; 
if  no  deluge  ever  took  place ;  if  the  children  of  Israel 
were  not  led  out  of  Egypt  by  the  special  interference  of 
God ;  if  the  supernatural  element  can  be  altogether 
discharged,  either  as  fraudulent  imposture  or  mere 
delusion:  why  then  certainly  the  sooner  this  strange 
book  is  buried  the  better.  '  If,'  as  has  been  observed 
by  an  able  writer  in  Eraser's  Magazine,  '  the  rules  of 
criticism  require  us  to  set  aside,  as  fabulous  or  legendary, 
the  miraculous  events  related  in  the  Bible,  then  the  only 
witnesses  from  whom  we  learn  anything  regarding  God 
as  revealed  to  man  are  s^  entirely  discredited  that  we 
cannot  trust  anything  they  say.  The  Apostles'  Creed 
ought  in  this  cnse  to  be  reduced  to  the  words,  "  I  believe 
that  Jesus  Christ  was  crucified  under  Pontius  Pilate." 
The  rest  of  the  history  would  become  the  domain  of  the 
historical  imagination.' 

We  now  pr<:)ceed  to  enquire  whether  any  principle 


THE    EXTENT   OF   THE   CLAIM.  75 

can  be  found  by  the  Jipplication  of  which  the  inspired 
in  Scripture  can  be  separated  from  the  uninspired  ;  and 
further,  whether  intelligent  and  ordinarily  educated 
Christians  do  or  do  not  possess  any  faculty  by  the  use 
of  which  they  can  exercise  the  discrimination  needed. 


CHAPTER    III. 


THE    VERIFYING   FACULTY. 


We  now  approach  that  portion  of  our  task  which 
demands  of  us  a  principle^  by  the  help  of  which  we 
may,  without  weakening  faith  in  Scripture  as  a  whole, 
separate  its  parts,  and  distinguish  between  that  which 
is  Divine  and  that  which  is  human. 

Such  a  principle  will  assuredly  not  be  sought  for  in 
vain,  if  it  is  recollected  that  all  inspired  Scripture  is  con- 
gruous \  not  only  in  the  sense  of  being  in  itself  suitable 
and  pertinent  to  the  purpose  for  which  it  was  given,  but 
also  as  being  in  harmony  with  all  that  is  revealed  of  the 
character  of  God.  Further — and  for  this  statement  we 
have  inspired  authority — that  the  congruity  thus  exist- 
ing is  capahle  of  being  discerned  by  every  spiritual  man 
who  is  faithful  to  the  light  bestowed  upon  him. 

If  this  be  granted — and  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  the 
admission  can  be  refused — we  have  at  once  a  test  by 
which  everything  assumed  to  be  inspired  of  God  may 
be  tried  without  presumption,  and  with  little  probability 
of  mistake. 

Before  attempting  to  apply  any  such  test,  however,  it 
may  be  necessary  to  show  that  God  intended  that  His 
children  should  thus  discriminate ;  that  He  has  given 
them  all  that  is  needful  for  the  accomplishment  of  the 


THE   VERIFYING   FACULTY.  77 

work ;  and,  farther,  that  with  regard  to  Scripture,  He 
has  made  the  fulfihiient  of  this  duty  no  unimportant 
part  of  their  moral  probation. 

If,  therefore,  it  be  said,  as  it  probably  will,  that  any 
attempt  to  draw  a  distinction  between  different  parts  of 
the  Bible — to  separate  the  inspired  from  the  uninspired, 
the  Divine  from  the  human — renders  the  Book  as  a  whole 
useless  to  simple  Christians,  inasmuch  as  they  can  per- 
ceive no  such  differences,  it  is  enough  to  reply  that  this 
is  not  the  fact^  since  that  which  was  true  of  the  oral^  is 
equally  true  of  the  written  revelation. 

The  e:xhortation  of  the  Apostle  John  to  his  converts, 
'Beloved,  believe  not  every  spirit,  but  try  the  spirits 
whether  they  be  of  God,'  supposes  an  ability  in  every 
spiritually  enlightened  man,  whether  hearer  or  reader, 
to  discern  between  that  which  is  of  God  and  that  which 
is  not.  '  Ye  have  an  unction  from  the  Holy  One,'  says 
the  aged  saint,  and  in  the  power  of  this  unction,  *  ye 
(the  poorest  of  the  flock)  know  all  things.'  I  myself, 
he  says — and  if  he,  other  inspired  men  also — 'have 
not  written  unto  you  because  ye  know  not  the  truth, 
but  because  ye  know  it.  The  anointing  which  ye  have 
received  of  Him  abideth  in  you,  and  ye  need  not  that 
any  man  teach  you'  (1  John  ii.  20  and  27). 

We  call  this  '  the  verifying  fxculty,'  and  regard  it  as 
being  neither  more  nor  less  than  reason  enlightened  and 
sanctified  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  To  vilify  reason,  as  so 
many  good  but  ill-instructed  Christians  dio,  is  a  folly 
which  would  be  unpardonable,  if  it  did  not  commonly 
arise  from  sheer  ignorance  or  weakness  of  mind.  As 
Butler  truly  says,  '  Reason  is  the  only  faculty  we  have 
wherewith  to  judge  concerning  anything,  even  re  vela- 


78  LIBER   LIBEORTJM. 

tion  itself.'  Its  duty  in  relation  to  Scripture  is  to  judge, 
*  not  whether  it  contains  things  different  from  ichat  ice 
should  have  expected  from  a  wise,  just,  and  good  Being, 
but  whether  it  contains  things  plainly  contradictory  to 
wisdom,  justice,  or  goodness' — in  other  words,  to  what 
elsewhere  God  teaches  us  of  Himself. 

Of  course  all  this  goes  on  the  assumption  that  Divine 
teaching  is  addressed  to  men  who  have  at  least  some 
moral  sympathy  with  its  utterances ;  that  the  words  of 
God  are  spiritual  words ;  that  the  sheep  know  the  voice 
of  the  Good  Shepherd.  In  a  limited  sense,  much  of  this 
is  true  of  every  book  the  tendency  of  which  is  elevating. 
All  moral  teaching  worthy  of  the  name  addresses  itself 
to  the  coiisciousness  of  those  to  whom  it  speaks.  Only 
as  it  comes  in  contact  with  a  prepared  mind ;  only  as  it 
proves  an  interpreter  of  floating  and  half-formed  thought, 
or  is  the  expression  of  feelings  before  but  partially  re- 
cognised or  understood,  does  any  book  of  this  kind  pro- 
duce permanent  impressions,  or  prove  of  much  real 
value. 

But  this  is  true  of  the  Bible  in  an  altogether  pre- 
eminent degree ;  for  this  book,  whether  it  reveals  new 
truth,  or  whether  it  explains  a  man  to  himself,  is,  like 
the  sun  in  heaven,  seen  in  its  own  light.  Not  that  all 
truth  is  in  this  way  made  plain  to  all  persons ;  but  that 
everything  essential  to  the  growth  in  goodness  of  the 
man  who  reads,  is,  by  a  mysterious  affinity,  recognised 
and  laid  hold  of  for  the  soul's  salvation  from  evil.  The 
softened  heart  responds  to  words  which  awake  no  echo 
in  other  breasts.  It  is  always  so.  The  words  of  Him 
who  spake  '  as  never  man  spake,'  only  elicited  scorn 
from  the  great  mass  of  those  who  heard  them  uttered. 


THE   VERIFTINa   FACULTY.  79 

The  seed  and  the  soil  must  be  adapted  to  each  other, 
or  there  can  be  no  living  product.  The  spiritual  faculty 
may  be  dormant,  the  '  God-consciousness '  all  but  dead, 
being  completely  overridden  by  '  self-consciousness,'  yet 
the  possession  of  it  is  always  recognised. 

It  is,  indeed,  not  a  little  singular  that  the  very  Book 
*  that  has  had  greater  influence  upon  the  world  than  all 
others,'  differs  from  all  others  in  aflfirming  the  darkness 
of  the  natural  man — that  man  is  spiritually  dead,  and 
in  making  that  statement  the  basis  of  all  that  it  contains 
respecting  the  past  and  present  and  future  of  mankind. 
Still  more  singular  is  it,  that  almost  all  men  feel  the 
truth  of  the  statement,  and  bow  before  its  declaration 
that  this  is  .not  their  true  life.  There  is  a  sense,  there- 
fore, in  Avhich  almost  all  thoughtful  men  feel  the  worth 
of  the  Bible;  some  of  those  not  least  who  have  most  felt 
themselves  compelled  to  oppose  it.  For  what  book  has 
sounded  so  the  depths  of  experience,  or  scaled  like  it 
the  highest  pinnacles  of  thought?  What  man  has  not 
learnt  through  it  better  to  know  himself?' 

The  Old  Testament  is  professedly  the  history  of  '  a 
peculiar  people.'  Its  prophecies  and  its  revelations 
were  all  but  confined  to  them.  The  discourses  of 
Jesus,  without  any  exclusion  of  the  many,  were,  for 
the  most  part,  addressed  to  the  few.  The  Epistles 
were  all  written  to  persons  acknowledging  the' Divine 
authority  of  the  writers.  Why,  then,  should  it  be 
thought  strange  to  hold  that  the  same  utterances,  which 
were  originally  addressed  only  to  those  who  were  more 
or  less  capable  of  estimating  their  value,  should  still  be 
in  harmony  with  the  spiritual  intuitions  of  those  only 
^  Man  and  his  Dwelling-place  :  an  Essay. 


80  LIBER   LIBKORUM. 

who  are  prepared  to  receive  tliem  with  docility?  *  Unto 
him  that  hath  shall  be  given.'  The  knowledge  of  God 
is  not  imparted  to  men  as  if  it  were  evidence  addressed 
to  the  senses,  nor  can  it  be  conveyed  by  any  merely 
logical  process  similar  to  the  demonstrations  of  science. 
No  moral  truth  can  be  understood  until  it  is  appre- 
ciated, and  to  be  appreciated  it  must  he  practiced. 

That  there  is  a  Divine  teacher  of  man's  spirit,  and 
that  it  is  possible  for  a  man's  spirit  to  have  converse 
with  that  teacher,  is  a  truth  which  would  remain  true  if 
the  Bible  and  all  its  revelations  were  to  be  annihilated ; 
but  the  recognition  of  this  truth  would  still  be  of  no 
practical  use  to  any  man  who  Was  unwilling  to  list^i 
and  obey.  It  matters  not  whether  we  call  the  special 
faculty  by  which  man  attains  to  a  knowledge  of  the 
Divine,  a  spiritual  gift  or  a  verifying  power ;  the  fact 
is  the  same ;  without  it  all  is  dark  alike  in  the  Bible 
and  in  the  highest  intuitions  of  the  soul.  Tenets  may 
be  drawn  from  Scripture  by  any  man,  but  living  truths 
only  by  prepared  hearts.  It  is  the  forgetfulness  or  the 
denial  of  this  fact  which  renders  so  niuch  that  has  been 
written  on  '  the  verifying  faculty '  in  man  unsatisfactory ; 
since,  according  to  the  moral  state  of  each  individual, 
does  the  application  of  the  phrase  in  question  embody  a 
great  truth,  or  involve  a  pernicious  error. 

'The  conditions  which  are  required  for  arriving  at 
the  knowledge  of  Divine  truth  are  sui'ely  stern  con- 
ditions !  It  is  a  straight  and  narrow  way  which  leadeth 
to  life!  There  must  be  a  continual  waiting  for  hght; 
a  distrust  of  our  own  assumptions;  a  readiness  to  be 
detected  in  error,  certain  that  God's  meaning  is  in- 
finitely  larger   than   ours,   and   that    other    men   may 


TUE    VERIFYING   FACULTY.  81 

perceive  an  aspect  of  it  whicli  we  do  not  perceive  ;  a 
belief  that  He  is  fulfilling  His  promise  that  all  shall  be 
taught  of  Him  in  ways  which  we  cannot  imagine ;  a 
dread  of  shutting  out  any  truth  by  our  impatient  notion 
that  it  must  contradict  some  other ;  a  determination  to 
maintain  what  little  has  been  given  us  in  the  hope  of 
its  expansion,  and  never  to  contradict,  if  we  understand 
ever  so  little,  what  may  have  been  given  to  another ;  a 
resolution  to  hold  the  ground  on  which  we  stand,  with- 
out judging  him  if  he  cannot  yet  see  what  this  ground 
is.  Hard  is  it  to  form  these  habits  of  mind.  .  .  I  can- 
not help  perceiving  that  this  mind,  the  mind  of  the  little 
child,  the  mind  which  our  Lord  demands  of  us,  has  been 
exhibited  by  many  scientific  men  who  have  been  cen- 
sured and  scorned  by  the  religious  world  of  their  day, 
and  has  been  sadly  deficient  in  their  accusers." 
1  Without  spiritual  insight^  nothing  is  discerned  which 
takes  hold  of  the  spirit  or  influences  the  character. 
Until  this  is  received,  truth  itself  is  but  an  opinion  to 
the  man  who  comes  in  contact  with  it.  It  does  not 
vitalise  because  it  is  not  itself  vital.  It  is  only  a  human 
judgment,  and,  whether  true  or  false,  has  little  if  any 
moral  power  in  it.  It  is  dead,  being  alone.  Not  until 
opinion  is  transfigured — not  until  it  quickens  into  life 
— does  it  become  a  truth,  and  grow,  and  bring  forth 
frtlit. 

But  another  consequence  follows.  Looked  at  in  this 
way  it  is  of  no  moment  that  either  the  uninstructed  or 
tlie  instructed  man  should  be  able  to  say  regarding  each 
separate  passage  of  Scripture,  tlds  is  inspired,  that  is 

^  The  Claims  of  the  Bible  and  of  Science.     By  the  Rev.  F.    D. 

Maurice. 

4* 


82  LIBER   LIBEOECTM. 

not.  How  can  he  indeed?  The  revelation  itself  is  not 
a  thing  apart  from  daily  life,  but  through  its  various 
relations  ;  how,  then,  can  any  man  undertake  to  separate 
in  each  particular  the  supernatural  element  fiom  the 
natui-al  which  it  irradiates  and  explains?  To  regard 
anything  of  the  kind  as  necessary  either  to  confidence  or 
to  edification  is  absurd;  as  absurd,  in  fact,  as  it  is  to 
maintain  that  '  we  require  an  exercise  of  judgment  upon 
the  written  document  before  we  can  allow  men  to  trust 
in  their  King  and  Saviour.'  Everyone  knows  that  this 
is  not  the  fact;  that  in  all  time  the  multitude  never 
have,  nor  ever  can  enter  upon  any  such  enquiries ;  that 
the  masses  must  either  believe  in  Christ  directly  as  an 
actual  person  related  to  them,  and  recognised  by  them 
in  their  inmost  souls,  or  they  will  not  believe  at  all. 
They  listen  to  the  announcement  that  Christ  is  their 
Redeemer,  and  they  believe  the  good  wQw^just  in  so  far 
as  it  finds  a  response  in  their  own  spiritual  necessities 
and  GonsciousJiess.  Into  evidence  about  documents  they 
cannot  enter. 

And  why  should  they  ?  The  analytical  chemist,  when 
called  upon  to  do  so,  separates  the  constituent  parts  of 
the  very  atmosphere  he  breathes  ;  but  for  all  the  practi- 
cal purposes  of  life  he  well  knows  that  such  a  process  is 
altogether  needless.  Forgetful  of  his  science,  he  rejoices 
in  the  free  air  of  heaven  just  as  the  peasant  does,  and 
thanks  God  for  its  vitality.  So  is  it  with  Scripture. 
The  critic  may  doubt  or  may  be  satisfied  as  to  the  pre- 
cise place  which  such  oi*  such  a  passage  ought  or  ought 
not  to  occupy  in  relation  to  other  portions  of  Holy  Writ, 
and  there  are  times  and  seasons  when  such  considera- 
tions are  both  proper  and  profitable.     But  he  can  scarcely 


THE    VERIFYING   FACULTY.  83 

be  regarded  as  a  wise  man  who,  coming  to  the  Bible  for 
strength  or  consolation,  for  instruction  in  righteousness, 
or  for  help  in  the  perfecting  of  his  character,  does  any- 
thing else  thnn  open  his  heart  to  its  divine  teachings, 
and  rejoice  like  a  little  child  in  the  sunshine  it  can  shed 
around  his  path. 

If  error  were  in  the  Bible  cunningly  interspersed  with 
truth,  the  case  would  be  different.  But  it  is  not  so. 
The  Book,  as  a  whole  and  as  it  stands,  is  wholesome  and 
useful ;  each  portion  of  it  has  its  proper  place,  and  is 
adequate  to  fulfil  its  appointed  end.  Everything  has 
its  purpose  to  fulfil  and  its  object  to  accomplish,  whether, 
properly  speaking,  inspired  or  not.  Nothing  may  be 
de^ipised,  nothing  pronounced  superfluous.  But  every- 
thing in  the  Book  does  not  take  hold  alike  on  the  heart 
and  conscience.  It  may  be  very  interesting,  as  indeed 
it  is,  to  trace  on  the  map  the  various  journeyings  of  St. 
Paul,  or  the  wanderings  of  the  Children  of  Israel  in  the 
wilderness  ;  to  note  a  hundred  undesigned  coincidences  ; 
to  study,  and  try  to  reconcile  two  apparently  conflicting 
genealogies  ;  to  examine  into  and  to  discuss  the  chrono- 
logy, the  geography,  or  the  natural  history  of  Palestine ; 
all  this  and  much  more  may  be  done — and  it  is  fitting 
that  in  its  time  and  place  it  should  be  done — yet  it  may 
be  accomplished  without  the  slightest  moral  or  spiritual 
benefit  arising  to  the  man  who  is  thus  occupied. 

Real  benefit  can,  in  such  cases,  only  be  derived  from 
connecting  the  information  thus  acquired  with  living 
truth  found  elsewhere ;  by  gathering  from  such  research 
indirect  evidence  in  favor  of  the  Book  itself,  or  pleasing 
illustrations  to  be  used  in  its  exposition.  But  this  is  a 
very  different  state  of  mind  from  that  which  is  produced 


84:  LIBER    LIBROKUM. 

by  a  devout  study  of  Moses  and  the  prophets ;  of  the 
Psalms ;  of  Isaiah  ;  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount ;  of  the 
discourses  and  prayers  of  our  Lord  with  His  a230stles ; 
of  the  scenes  of  the  Crucifixion ;  of  the  early  history  of 
the  Church  as  given  in  the  Acts  or  in  the  Epistles ;  or 
of  the  wondrous  visions  of  the  Apocalypse.  Criticism, 
to  the  uncritical  mind,  seems  in  such  cases  to  be  an 
impertinence.  The  heart  opens  to  the  impression  such 
passages  produce,  as  the  flower  opens  to  the  sun  or  the 
earth  drinks  in  the  rain  of  heaven. 

Facts,  whether  past  or  present,  correspond  to  this 
view  of  things. 

We  have  already  seen  that  the  first  Christians  were 
under  the  very  same  obligation  to  distinguish  the  voice 
of  God  from  the  voice  of  man  that  we  are ;  and  since 
they  were  enabled  to  do  so  only  by  an  endowment  com- 
mon to  Christians  of  all  time,  and  known  as  '  the  witness 
of  the  spirit,'  they  were  practically  in  the  same  position 
as  ourselves.  Even  the  most  orthodox  divines  are  con- 
strained to  admit  that  the  Scriptures  can  only  be  received 
on  certain  conditions,  viz.,  that  we  are  'satisfied  that  the 
books  themselves  contain  nothing  obviously  incompatl- 
hle  with  the  ascription  to  their  authors  of  the  Divine 
assistance,  but  on  the  contrary  are  in  all  respects  favour- 
able to  the  supposition.  We  want  to  see,'  says  Dr. 
Alexander,  '  that  they  are  in  harmony  with  each  other ; 
that  the  statements  they  contain  are  credible ;  that  the 
doctrines  they  teach  are  not  foolish,  immoral,  or  self- 
contradictory  ;  that  their  authors  really  assumed  to  be 
under  the  Divine  direction  in  what  they  wrote,  and 
afforded  competent  proofs  of  this  to  those  around  them." 
^  Kitto's  Bib.  Cycl.,  art.  '  Canon.' 


THE    VERIFYING   FACULTY.  85 

But  all  this  clearly  supposes  the  exercise  of  a  verifying 
faculty. 

The  facts  of  the  present  day,  as  they  come  under  our 
own  observation,  are  all  confirmatory.  It  is  'the  wise' 
only  who  '  understand.'  The  peasant  is,  in  this  respect, 
often  far  before  the  philosopher.  Everything  depends 
on  the  moral  condition  of  the-  recipient.  Who  ever 
knew  a  man  under  the  dominant  influence  of  pride  able 
either  to  comprehend  or  to  estimate  the  moral  dignity 
of  humility  ?  When  was  a  supremely  selfish  man  alive 
to  the  duty  of  self-sacrifice  ?  Where  do  we  find  men 
full  of  ignorance  and  conceit — to  say  nothing  of  spiritual 
things — able  to  judge  the  value  of  a  great  work  of  art, 
or  to  pronounce  on  the  merits  of  some  marvellous  pro- 
duction of  science  or  of  statesmanship? 

But  here  a  paradox  appears.  It  is  this.  The  light  of 
which  we  speak — the  quickening  and  elevating  power 
in  the  strength  of  which  we  are  to  recognize  the  Divine 
— is  never  attained  except  by  spiritual  culture  effected 
through  the  instrumentality  of  the  revelation  itself. 
The  Book  to  be  recognized  and  obeyed  must  itself  have 
more  or  less  educated  the  consciousness  which  is  to 
accept  it.  The  word  is 'the  sword  of  the  Spirit,'  and 
the  same  Lord  who  says,  '  He  that  is  of  the  truth  heareth 
My  voice,'  says  also,  '  I  am  the  Truth.'  It  follows,  there- 
fore, that  before  any  man  can  judge  of  truth,  he  must 
receive  'the  truth,'  believe  in  it,  and  be,  more  or  less, 
educated  by  it. 

Yet,  after  all,  this  is  not  more  paradoxical  than  the 
kindred  fact  that  before  a  man  can  judge  as  to  the 
merits  of  a  great  artist,  he  must,  to  some  extent,  be 
educated  by  the  artist ;  or,  to  take  a  wider  illustration, 


86  LIBEE    LIBKOETJM. 

that  a  man  must  himself  become  civilised  before  he  can 
perceive  how  great  a  blessing  civilisation  is. 

That  this  way  of  looking  at  the  matter  makes  the 
evidence  for  the  truth  of  the  Bible  mainly  subjective 
cannot  be  disputed ;  but  nothing  else  in  the  present  day 
appears  to  have  much  hold  on  men.  It  may  indeed 
seriously  be  doubted  whether  it  is  now  possible  to  bring 
forward  any  evidence,  in  favour  of  miracles  for  instance, 
which  could  reasonably  be  expected  to  satisfy  an  uncon- 
cerned spectator,  and  still  less  an  opponent. 

In  the  days  of  our  Lord  and  His  apostles,  the  miracle 
was  evidence  that  the  teacher  was  from  God.  Now,  the 
doctrine  must  give  probability  to  the  miracle.  The 
mere  fact  that '  wonders  were  wrought '  by  the  apostles, 
could  this  be  demonstrated,  would  of  itself  avail  little 
to  convince  any  man  of  the  truth  of  what  they  taught. 
Nor  perhaps  ought  it  to  be  otherwise.  It  is  only  when 
coupled  with  other  considerations,  such  as  the  character 
of  the  Christian  miracles,  their  simplicity,  benevolence, 
and  unselfish  ends,  that  the  force  of  the  argument 
founded  on  them  comes  to  be  felt.  Well  and  wisely  has 
it  been  remarked  that  '  the  entire  series  of  miracles  re- 
corded by  the  Evangelists,  consummated  as  they  were 
by  the  miracle  of  Christ's  resurrection,  occupy  a  place 
of  perpetual  efficacy  in  relation  separately  to  each  of  the 
great  purposes  for  which  the  Lord  of  Life  came  amongst 
us,  viz.  as  Saviour  of  the  world,  as  Redeemer  of  His 
people,  and  as  Conqueror  in  the  world  of  spirits.' '  In 
each  of  these  particulars  the  miracles  attest  His  mission, 
and  are  in  all  respects  congruous  with  His  teaching. 
The  observation  of  these  characteristics  is  the  result  of 
^  Restoration  of  Belief,  p.  265. 


THE   VERIFYING    FACULTY.  87 

the  application  of '  the  verifying  faculty '  to  the  miracles 
of  the  New  Testament  generally. 

Of  all  the  miracles,  however,  the  resurrection  of  Christ, 
involving  as  it  does  our  own  rising  again,  is  the  one  on 
the  fact  of  which  most  turns ;  for  resurrection  does  not 
signify  existence  elseichere  under  diiferent  conditions — it 
is  the  renewal  of  the  old.  It  is  the  reconstitution  of 
humanity,  accompanied  in  each  individual  by  a  sense  of 
identity :  with  the  remembrance  of  a  past,  as  well  as 
the  consciousness  of  a  future.  Everything  in  Christi- 
anity hangs  on  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  'It  knows 
Christ  only  as  risen :  the  only  reason  of  its  own  exis- 
tence that  it  recognises  is  the  resurrection.  The  only 
claim  the  apostles  set  forth  for  preaching  it  is,  that  their 
Master  who  was  crucified  was  alive  once  more.'  No 
supposed  delusion  can  account  for  this  belief  that  Christ 
rose  from  the  dead.  If  that  which  is  asserted  in  Scrip- 
ture regarding  it  be  not  true,  the  whole  is  a  rank  im- 
posture. Either  there  was  a  crucified  and  risen  Christ 
long  before  any  part  of  the  New  Testament  was  written, 
or  the  book  that  asserts  this  to  have  been  the  case  is  a 
fraud.  Th.e  New  Testament  emphatically  is  based  on 
Christ,  not  Christ  on  it. 

It  may  indeed  be  said  that,  in  relation  to  miracle, 
there  is  no  room  for  the  exercise  of  a  verifying  faculty, 
since  miracles  are  simply  impossible,  the  laws  of  nature 
being  incapable  of  violation.  If  it  be  so,  the  laws  of 
nature  are  more  powerful  than  their  Creator,  which  is 
simply  absurd. 

One  thing,  however,  is  quite  certain — the  admission 
of  the  supernatural  is  essential  to  the  acceptance  of  any 
Divine  revelation  whatever ;  for  revelation,  if  anything 


88  LIBER   LIBEORUM. 

at  all,  is  itself  a  miracle.  Christianity  being  what  it  is, 
and  its  announcements  what  they  profess  to  be, '  miracles 
are  necessary  to  the  justification  of  such  announcements, 
which  indeed,  unless  they  are  supernatural  truths,  are 
the  wildest  delusions.'  A  man's  faith  in  the  Bible  may 
not  indeed  conscioiidy  rest  on  miracles,  but  it  cannot  be 
a  genuine  faith  unless  he  admits  their  reality,  since,  if 
not  true,  the  assertion  of  them  discredits  everything  else 
that  the  book  contains. 

Yet  why  should  so  much  be  said  about  miracles  be- 
ing violations  of  law  ?  It  is  by  no  means  so  clear  that 
a  miracle  is  a  violation  of  law.  '  We  ourselves,'  says  a 
recent  writer,  '  formerly  had  no  belief  in  miracles,  be- 
cause we  saw  no  evidence  of  supernatural  powers  work- 
ing in  the  natural  world;  but  when  asked  if  we  had 
ever  seriously  looked  for  any  evidence  of  this  kind,  we 
were  obliged  to  confess  we  had  not ;  and  were  aston- 
ished to  find  that,  on  seeking  icith  a  icill^  there  was 
abundant  evidence  in  the  history  of  humanity.  .  .  .  The 
action  of  supernatural  forces  upon  mind  and  matter  is 
necessarily  as  simple  and  as  much  in  harmony  with 
general  laws  as  the  action  of  natural  forces  upon  mind 
and  matter ;  the  only  difference  being  that  the  actors 
in  one  case  are  inhabitants  of  this  natural  world,  while, 
in  other  cases,  they  are  inhabitants  of  the  supernatural 
world. 

'  Those  who  refuse  to  look  for  evidence  of  super- 
natural forces  and  phenomena,  delude  themselves  and 
their  followers  by  a  false  play  of  words.  They  very 
properly  refuse  to  credit  stories  about  "  arbitrary  inter- 
ferences with  eternal  laws  of  nature ;"  and  then  most 
improperly  presume  not  only  to  know  which  are  and 


THE   VERIFYING   FACULTY.  89 

which  are-  not  eternal  laws  of  nature,  but  also  to  affirm 
that  all  miraculous  and  supernatural  phenomena  must 
necessarily  be  "  arbitrary  interferences  with  eternal 
laws." 

'  If  a  man  kills  a  bird,  or  causes  a  tree  to  wither  and 
die  by  the  aid  of  natural  forces,  it  is  not  deemed  an 
arbitrary  interference;  but  if  Christ  causes  a  barren  fig 
tree  to  wither  and  die  by  the  aid  of  supernatural  forces, 
it  is  an  arbitrary  interference  with  eternal  laws.  If  a 
man  is  struck  dead  by  lightning  it  is  not  an  arbitrary 
interference;  but  if  Ananias  fall  dead  at  the  feet  of  the 
Apostle  Peter  it  is  an  arbitrary  interference  and  there- 
fore incredible.  Such  modes  of  reasoning  engender 
pestilent  fallacies.  It  is  well  known  that  superior  forces 
can  displace  inferior  forces  without  any  arbitrary  inter- 
ference with  immutable  laws ;  and  therefore  the  real 
question  to  be  examined  is,  the  existence  of  supernatural 
forces  and  phenomena^  whether  in  accordance  with 
known  or  unknown  laws.'^ 

Yet  even  here  discrimination  is  needed.  If  the 
tendency  of  some  minds  is  to  universal  scepticism  in 
relation  to  the  supernatural,  that  of  others  is  to  the 
credulous  acceptance  of  almost  everything  professing 
to  be  of  this  character.  Hence  the  necessity  for  a  veri- 
fying faculty  in  man,  which,  aj^art  altogether  from 
ordinary  investigation,  should  judge  that  which  pro- 
fesses to  be  spiritual  by  a  spiritual  standard.  'False 
prophets,'  says  our  Lord  to  His  disciples  '  shall  arise, 
and  shall  show  great  signs  and  v)onders\  insomuch  that, 
if  it  were  j^ossible,  they  shall  deceive  the  very  elect ' 
(Matt.  xxiv.  24).  St.  John  in  the  Apocalypse,  too, 
*  Philosophy  of  Religion.     By  Hugh  Doherty,  M.  D. 


90  LIBER   LIBKOKUM. 

however  obscurely,  speaks  of  a  time  when  'spirits  of 
devils'  (demons)  will  go  forth  'working  miracles' 
(Rev.  xvi.  14).  Again,  he  describes  an  apostate  who 
should  ^deceive  them  that  dwell  on  the  earth  by  the 
means  of  those  miracles  lohich  he  had  ijoioer  to  do ' 
(Rev.  xiii.  14).  The  security  against  such  deceivers  is 
not  to  be  found  in  scepticism— for  sceptics  are  often 
singularly  credulous,  and  commonly  more  or  less  super- 
stitious— but  in  that  verifying  faculty  which  is  by  John 
identified  with  the  'anointing'  Christians  receive  from 
Him  who  abideth  in  them. 

That,  as  a  rule,  mankind  should  be  only  too  ready 
to  believe  in  the  supernatural  is  not  surprising.  The 
great  silence  of  God  when  oppression  and  wrong  are 
rampant  in  the  earth,  is  often  a  severe  trial  to  the  faith 
even  of  the  best.  Hence  the  singular  proneness  of  most 
persons  to  judge  hastily,  and  to  interpret  rashly  both 
providences  and  predictions.  The  human  mind  cannot 
be  bounded  by  time;  it  ever  longs  to  pierce  the  in- 
visible. Here,  too,  therefore,  is  to  be  found  abundant 
scope  for  the  exercise  of  that  spiritual  insight  which  is 
the  true  verifying  faculty,  as  much  when  it  restrains  as 
when  it  enlightens. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

MANY  AUTHORS,  BUT  ONE  BOOK. 

We  propose  now  to  revert  to  a  peculiarity  of  the 
Bible  which  was  incidentally  referred  to  in  a  preceding 
chapter,  but  not  dwelt  upon  as  it  deserves  to  be,  viz., 
the  marvellous  unity  which  subsists  between  its  differ- 
ent parts. 

Scripture,  as  we  all  know,  is  a  collection  of  tracts, 
the  work  of  above  thirty  authors,  who  utter  what  they 
have  to  say,  not  contemporaneously,  but  in  succession, 
and  along  a  vast  line  of  time,  say  1,G00  years.  Yet,  in 
spite  of  this,  we  all  feel  it  to  be  one  Book.  We  do 
so  because,  explain  it  as  we  may,  we  see,  as  Mr.  De 
Qiiincy  says,  that  '  all  the  writers  combine  to  one  end, 
and  lock,  like  parts  of  a  great  machine,  into  one  system.' 
On  this  peculiarity  the  argument  has  been  founded — 
and  it  is  a  weighty  one — that  inasmuch  as  concert  in 
the  writers  was  impossible,  the  unity  in  question  places 
the  Bible  in  a  position  altogether  distinct  from  that  of 
any  other  book  ;  and  seems  at  least  to  justify  the  as- 
sumption that  its  preparation  under  Divine  direction  is, 
in  some  sense  or  other,  and  in  a  very  high  sense  too,  a 
great  fact. 

We  turn  to  the  Book,  then,  in  order  to  discover 
whetlier  that  which  has  been  asserted  regarding  its 
unity  amid  diversity  is  true,  or  only  a  fancy. 


92  LIBEE   LIBKORUM. 

The  first  sentence  that  meets  the  eye  consists  of  teu 
pregnant  words  :  '  In  the  beginning  God  created  the 
heavens  and  the  earth ; '  words  that  involve  an  utter 
denial  of  the  Pagan  doctrine  of  the  eternity  of  matter, 
and  an  equally  positive  denial  of  the  Pantheistic  theory 
that  God  is  but  the  soul  of  the  universe.  For  they 
affirm  most  positively :  first,  that  in  some  far  distant 
period — how  distant  we  know  not — the  world  in  which 
we  live  had  a  beginning ;  and  next,  that  He  who  created 
it  is  altogether  distinct  from  it,  a  personal  God,  endowed 
with  Almighty  power  and  infinite  wisdom.  On  this 
assertion  all  subsequent  revelation  clearly  proceeds. 

The  successive  stages  of  that  wondrous  process,  by 
which  order  sprang  out  of  chaos,  light  out  of  darkness, 
and  sea  and  land,  sun  and  moon,  grass  and  herb,  beast 
and  fowl,  and  finally  man  and  woman,  came  into  exist- 
ence, is  next  brought  under  notice.  Then  follows  the 
story  of  the  Garden  and  the  Fall ;  the  exi^ulsion  from 
Eden ;  the  birth  of  Cain ;  the  murder  of  Abel ;  the 
longevity  and  rapid  increase  of  mankind;  the  equally 
rapid  growth  of  wickedness  ;  and,  after  abundant  warn- 
ing, the  final  destruction  of  a  sinful  race  in  waters  from 
which  Noah  and  his  family  are  alone  preserved. 

Other  records  of  the  world's  earliest  history  have  we 
none.  The  question  is  therefore  an  imj^ortant  one,  Can 
this  be  depended  upon  ?  The  momentous  point  is,  not 
whether  everything  recorded  is  to  be  taken  in  its  most 
literal  acceptation,  for  this,  we  have  already  seen,  is  not 
essential  to  trustworthiness ;  but  whether  the  narrative 
can  be  depended  upon  in  that  higher  sense  which  im- 
plies the  truest  impressi07i  that,  under  the  circumstances, 
could  be  produced  on  mankind  as  a  whole.     This  is 


MANY   AUfHOES,    BUT   ONE    BOOK.  93 

essential.  If  a  writer  intentionally  leaves  a  false  im- 
])ression,  his  work  is  fraudulent  and  worthless.  Further, 
if  a  narrative  be  in  spirit  untrue,  nothing  stable  can  be 
built  upon  it;  for  what  is  any  erection  worth  that  rests 
only  on  a  quicksand  ?  But — and  to  this  attention  should 
be  specially  directed — the  narrative  before  us  is  either  a 
foundation  or  it  is  nothing.  All  that  follows  evidently 
rests  upon  it.  Its  essential  accuracy  is  taken  for  granted 
by  every  subsequent  writer,  and  if  the  truthfulness  of  it 
be  even  doubtful,  the  entire  volume  of  revelation  is 
doubtful  too. 

Let  us  take,  then,  first,  the  seven  brief  chapters  of 
whose  contents  we  have  been  speaking,  and  examine 
them  narrowly.  In  doing  this  it  is  scarcely  possible  to 
fail  in  perceiving  two  leading  elements :  an  historic  ele- 
ment mingling  with  a  didactic  one ;  and  a  supernatural 
element  involving  both  miraculous  occurrences  and  pre- 
dictions relating  to  the  future. 

The  first  element  (the  historic)  embraces  the  actual 
narrative  regarded  as  true,  and  equally  true^  whether 
any  portion  of  it  be  veiled  in  allegory  or  not,  whether 
it  be  a  literal  narrative,  or  only  '  an  inspired  psalm  of 
creation.'  The  didactic  associated  with  it,  is  involved  in 
passages  such  as  those  which  deny  the  eternity  of  matter; 
affirm  the  personality  of  the  Creator;  imply  a  day  of 
rest;  or  exhibit  the  probationary  character  of  human 
existence,  as  it  appears  in  the  test  to  which  our  first 
parents  were  subjected,  and  in  the  great  lesson  involved 
therein,  that  he  who  had  just  been  created  in  the  image 
of  God,  and  invested  with  power  over  every  living  thing, 
must,  before  he  could  govern  well,  learn  implicitly  to 
obey;    in  the  relation    established  between   man   and 


94:  LIBER   LEBEORUM. 

woman ;  in  the  representation  given  us  of  the  tempter, 
viz.,  as  an  animal  only,  endowed  indeed  with  high  in- 
tellect, but  without  a  ruhng  conscience,  without  any 
sense  of  duty,  or  anything  corresponding  to  unselfish 
aifection;  in  the  trial  of  obedience  being  found,  not  in 
one  great  act  of  self-sacrifice,  but  in  daily  and  hourly 
resistance  to  temptation  regarding  an  apparent  trifle, 
and  this  without  being  able  to  perceive  the  reason  or  the 
usefulness  of  the  self-denial  demanded;  in  the  retribution 
which  follows  sin ;  in  the  communication  of  an  evil 
nature  to  descendants ;  in  the  institution  of  sacrifices, 
bloody  or  unbloody ;  and  in  the  final  sweeping  away  of 
the  wicked  from  the  earth  they  had  filled  with  violence. 
These  are  the  great  lessons  which,  embodied  in  the  his- 
tory, form  what  may  be  called  the  didactic  element. 

The  second  (the  supernatural)  is  seen  in  the  original 
act  of  creation,  in  the  temptation  by  a  speaking  serpent, 
and  in  the  desolations  of  the  flood. 

Now,  as  we  advance,  we  shall  have  to  notice  how 
these  combined  elements  go  to  make  up  all  that  we 
regard  as  sacred  writings,  whether  directly  inspii-ed  or 
only  providentially  preserved  ;  how  they  run  through 
each  separate  portion  of  the  books,  and  how  each  of 
these  elements  in  particular  connects  itself  with  that 
which  has  gone  before.  It  will  soon  be  obvious  that 
the  value  or  worthlessness  of  all  that  is  uttered  depends 
entirely  on  the  truthfulness,  or  otherwise,  of  the  basis 
on  which  it  rests. 

We  pass  on,  therefore,  to  the  consideration  of  the 
new  world  as  it  emerges  from  the  waters.  God  remem- 
bers Noah  ;  the  windows  of  heaven  are  closed ;  the 
waters  subside ;  the  Ark  rests  on  Ararat,  and  its  inmates 


MANY   AUTHORS,    BUT   ONE   BOOK.  95 

come  forth.  In  process  of  time  Ham  is  cursed  and  Shem 
and  Japheth  blessed.  Again  mankind  multiply ;  a  great 
empire  springs  into  existence ;  language  is  confounded, 
and  nations,  differing  in  speech,  plant  themselves  in  all 
parts  of  the  earth. 

The  elements  already  noticed  reappear.  The  historic 
runs  through  the  whole,  whether  certain  portions  be 
regarded  as  literal  or  figurative.  The  didactic  mingling 
therewitb  appears  in  the  recognition  of  seven  days  as  a 
division  of  time ;  in  the  renewal  of  sacrifice ;  in  the  for- 
bidding to  eat  anything  while  living;  in  the  declaration 
that  whoso  sheddeth  man's  blood,  by  man  shall  his 
blood  be  shed ;  in  the  command  to  be  fruitful  and  mul- 
tiply, sanctifying  marriage;  and  in  the  drunkenness  of 
Noah,  inculcating  moderation  and  circumspection  in  the 
use  even  of  Divine  gifts.  The  supernatural  is  seen  in 
the  safety  of  the  Ark  and  its  inhabitants,  and  in  the 
preservation  and  distribution  of  the  animals.  The  pre- 
dictive, as  a  branch  of  the  supernatural,  appears  in  the 
curse  on  Canaan,  and  in  the  blessing  on  his  brethren. 

Here,  then,  we  have  the  second  course  of  sto?ies,  so  to 
speak,  needful  to  the  formation  of  that  great  mystical 
temple  of  truth,  which  is  now  rising  from  the  gi'ound ; 
and  nothing  can  be  more  obvious  than  that  this  second 
coarse  rests  uj^on,  and  dovetails  into,  the  first. 

The  calling  of  Abram,  that  of  him  might  be  made  a 
great  nation  ;  the  story  of  his  wanderings;  the  history 
of  Isaac  and  Jacob  ;  and  the  settlement  in  Egypt,  bring 
us  to  the  close  of  the  book  of  Genesis.  Need  it  be  said 
that  tliis  gives  us,  in  the  form  of  history,  the  only  ac- 
count of  patriarchal  times  that  the  world  possesses? 
And  how  wonderfully  vivid  and  natural  it  is !     What 


96  LIBER   LEBEORUM. 

light  it  throws  on  the  early  movements  of  mankind ; 
upon  the  biith  of  empires ;  upon  the  moral  state  of  a 
race  living  chiefly  on  traditions !  What  pictures  of  a 
nomadic  life,  not  so  very  different  from  that  of  the 
modern  Arab  of  the  desert !  What  an  insight  into  the 
Egypt  of  antiquity !  What  a  photograph  of  the  world 
as  it  was  four  thousand  years  ago ! 

In  the  didactic  portion  let  us  observe  the  character 
and  elevation  of  the  teaching.  First,  the  danger  as 
well  as  sin  of  deceit  and  falsehood  is  exemplified  in 
Abram's  duplicity  both  towards  Pharaoh  and  the  king 
of  Gerar;  in  Isaac's  conduct  under  similar  circum- 
stances ;  in  Jacob's  dealings  with  Esau ;  and  in  Rebe- 
kah's  treachery  towards  her  husband.  Let  us  observe, 
too,  how  the  sin  in  each  case  involves  a  cowardly  dis- 
trust of  God,  and  an  attempt  to  justify  the  evil  on  the 
ground  that  good  would  come  of  it,  as  if  the  Divine 
purposes  could  either  be  forwarded  or  thwarted  by 
human  fraud  and  deceit. 

Xext  ^ve  may  observe  how  the  duty  of  unselfishness, 
of  yielding  rather  than  striving  even  for  a  right,  is 
exemplified  by  Abraham  in  his  dealings  with  Lot,  and 
by  Isaac  with  the  herdmen  of  Gerar.  Then  we  have 
the  folly  of  worldliness  exhibited  in  Lot's  selection  of  a 
dwelling-place,  without  regard  to  its  moral  atmosphere, 
while  the  power  of  faith  and  the  beauty  of  self-sacrifice 
is  seen  in  the  offering  of  Isaac.^     The  spirit  of  a  dignified 

^  *  The  offering ' — i.  e.  the  giving  him  up  cheerfully  to  God  either 
for  life  or  death.  The  word  *  offering  '  {olah\  it  has  been  suggested, 
does  not  necessarily  imply  a  'burnt  oflfering,'  as  our  translators 
have  it.  And  it  is  certainly  worth  notice  that  no  command  is  given 
to  ^Vbraham  to  slay  his  son,  or  to  take  with  him  wood,  or  fire,  or 


MANY   AUTHORS,    BUT    ONE    BOOK.  97 

liberality  is  manifested  by  Abraham  in  the  purchase  of 
the  field  of  Ephron  the  Hittite ;  his  disinterestedness  in 
his  conduct  after  the  victory  over  the  kings ;  and  his 
prudent  foretliought  in  the  marriage  of  Isaac.  The 
odiousness  of  oppression  comes  out  in  the  history  of 
Laban's  transactions  with  Jacob ;   of  cruelty  in  the  con- 

knifo.  Abraham,  doubtless,  inferred  that  God  intended  him  to  kill 
his  child,  and  he  was  readj  for  the  sacrifice,  '  accounting  that  God 
was  able  to  raise  him  up  even  from  the  dead,  from  whence  also  he 
received  him  in  a  figure.'  But  this  does  not  prove  that  the  infer- 
ence was  a  right  one.  It  certainly  seems  incredible  that  God  should, 
under  any  circumstances,  or  for  any  purpose,  command  Abraham  to 
imitate  the  heathen,  and  bid  him  do  an  act  which  He  Himself  sub- 
sequently pronounced  an  abomination  (Deut.  xii.  31).  That  the 
patriarch  was  not  permitted  to  carry  out  his  intentions  is  only  what 
might  have  been  expected ;  while  the  spirit  of  faith,  obedience,  and 
self-sacrifice,  which  was  involved  in  his  willingness  to  resign  Isaac, 
was  not  the  less  approved  and  rewarded. 

Another  suggestion  has  been  thrown  out  by  Dean  Stanley,  viz., 
the  possibility  that  the  impression  Abi'aham  received  that  God 
wished  him  to  slay  his  son,  although  permitted  and  overruled,  camo 
from  Satan  rather  than  from  the  Lord ;  that  Satan's  design  was  to 
show,  as  in  the  case  of  Job,  that  there  was  a  limit  beyond  which 
Abraham's  faith  and  obedience  would  not  go — the  result  proving 
the  sincerity  and  the  power  of  the  godly  man's  faith,  for  the  exercise 
of  which  he  was  blessed  of  God  more  emphatically  than  ever.  This 
theory  is  supposed  to  find  support  from  the  fact  that  in  the  second 
book  of  Samuel  (xxiv.  1)  the  Lord  is  said  to  have  moved  David  to 
say,  *  Go,  number  Israel  and  Judah,'  while  the  same  act  is  in  the  first 
book  of  Chronicles  (xxi.  1)  attributed  to  Satan:  'And  Satan  stood 
up  against  Israel,  and  provoked  David  to  number  Israel.'  It  is 
every  way  uncandid  and  unworthy  of  a  Christian  man  to  assume 
that  either  of  these  suppositions  has  originated  in  a  sinful  unwil- 
lingness to  receive  Bible  statements  as  they  stand.  Rather  are  they 
occasioned  by  a  holy  fear  of  attributing  to  God  a  command  to  do  any- 
thing which  He  Himself  has  pronounced  evil. 
5 


98  LIBER   LIBKOEUM. 

duct  of  Simeon  and  Levi  toward  the  Shechemites. 
The  nobility  of  forgiveness  is  sho^vn  by  Esau  when  he 
meets  his  brother ;  the  power  of  prayer  in  the  interces- 
sion of  Abram  for  Sodom,  and  in  the  mystic  wrestle  of 
Jacob  with  the  angel ;  and,  finally,  the  retributive  jus- 
tice of  God  in  the  sorrows  of  Jacob,  and  in  the  distress 
of  Joseph's  brethren  when  brought  before  his  face  in 
Egypt.  To  say  that  this  teaching  is  elevated  is  to  say 
little.  To  suppose  that  it  is  the  work  of  any  fraudulent 
person,  imposing  upon  the  world  a  pretended  revelation, 
is  simply  extravagant  and  absurd. 

The  predictive  element  enlarges  as  we  proceed.  In 
the  covenant  with  Abraham ;  in  the  promise  made  to 
him  and  to  his  descendants;  in  the  various  renewals  of 
the  covenant;  in  the  dying  blessings  of  Isaac  and  Jacob; 
in  the  childish  dreams  of  Joseph  about  himself  and  his 
brethren ;  and  in  his  later  prophecies  regarding  the 
butler  and  the  baker,  and  respecting  the  seven  years' 
famine,  we  see  the  same  claim  to  the  power  of  foreseeing 
future  events  put  forward,  which  we  observed  in  the 
earlier  portion.  The  supernatural,  in  air  its  forms, 
rather  increases  than  diminishes.  The  plaguing  of 
Pharaoh's  house  on  account  of  Sarah;  the  appearance 
and  conversation  of  the  angels  at  the  door  of  Abram's 
tent;  the  destruction  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah;  the 
smoking  furnace  and  the  burning  lamp;  the  birth  of 
Isaac ;  the  vision  of  Abimelech ;  the  voice  to  Hagar ; 
Jacob's  dream  at  Haran ;  his  vision  of  God's  host ;  and, 
above  all,  the  marvellous  separation  of  this  one  family 
from  all  other  peoples,  are  events  which,  if  in  any  sense 
true,  are  certainly  supernatural. 

Observe,  too,  how  all  these  events  grow  naturally  out 


MANY  AUTHORS,  BUT  ONE  BOOK.         90 

of  those  that  had  preceded  them.  The  tendency  to  • 
corruption  after  the  deluge  had  been  shown  at  Babel ;  it 
had,  as  the  nations  multiplied,  spread  far  and  wide;  it 
was  needful  that  this  tendency  should  be  corrected,  for 
there  was  a  modified  idolatry  even  in  a  family  like 
Laban's,  and  atrocious  wickedness  had  been  manifested 
in  Sodom  and  Gomorrah.  The  world  was  morally 
sinking,  yet  it  had  not  altogether  sunk,  for  both  Pharaoh 
and  Abimelech  fear  God ;  Melchisedek  is  a  patriarchal 
priest,  before  whom  Abraham  bows  ;  and  Joseph  though 
a  prince  of  Egypt,  recognises  and  serves  the  God  of  his 
fathers.  The  very  wickedness  that  is  committed  by 
the  various  members  or  connections  of  the  chosen 
family:  the  incest  of  Lot;  the  treacherous  murder  of 
the  Shechemites  in  revetige  for  the  violence  of  the  son 
of  Hamor;  the  sin  of  Reuben;  the  selling  of  Joseph  by 
his  brethren ;  their  falsehood  to  their  f  ither ;  the  dis- 
obedience of  Er  and  Onan ;  the  wickedness  of  Judah, 
and  the  folly  of  Tamar,  nil  testify  to  a  state  of  society 
precisely  such  as  might  be  anticij^ated  on  the  supposition 
that  the  world  was  exactly  what  it  is  stated  to  be.  As 
Cain  and  Abel  were  but  types  of  classes  of  their  de- 
scendant!^, so  Shem  and  Ham  continually  repeat  them- 
selves in  the  best  and  in  the  worst  of  their  race.  The 
third  course  of  stones^  then,  fits  exactly  to  the  second, 
and  must  stand  or  fall  with  its  predecessors. 

We  hasten  on  to  the  exodus  of  the  chosen  people ;  to 
their  wanderings  through  the  desert;  to  the  establish- 
ment of  the  ceremonial  law ;  and  to  their  settlement  in 
Canaan  under  the  leadership  of  Joshua.  This  brings 
US  to  the  end  of  the  Pentateuch.  Is  this  also,  we  ask, 
dependent  upon  the  preceding  ?     Assuredly  it  is.     All 


100  LIBER   LIBEOKUM. 

the  events  narrated  spring  out  of  that  which  has  gone 
before,  and  cannot  by  any  stretch  of  ingenuity  be  ex- 
plained without  it. 

The  same  elements  again  appear.  The  historic, 
whether  the  narrative  in  all  its  details  is  always  accu- 
rate or  not.  The  didactic,  in  the  addition  to  the  great 
moral  principles  laid  down  in  former  portions,  of  a  code 
of  laws  adapted  to  the  particular  necessities  of  a  pecu- 
liar people.  The  predictiv^e,  in  the  song  of  blessing  by 
Moses,  and  in  the  utterances  of  Balaam.  In  a  certain 
sense,  indeed,  the  entire  ceremonial  law,  its  sacrifices, 
its  washings,  its  symbolic  worship,  all  involve  a  predic- 
tive element ;  for  they  all  seem  to  point  to  something 
better  than  themselves,  which  in  due  time  should  be 
manifested  on  the  earth.  The  supernatural  is  indeed 
everywhere.  The  plagues  of  Egypt ;  the  passage  of 
the  Red  Sea ;  the  fall  of  the  manna ;  the  flight  of 
quails ;  the  water  gushing  from  the  rock ;  the  giving 
of  the  law  at  Mount  Sinai ;  the  deaths  of  Dathan  and 
Abiram,  and  of  Nadab  and  Abihu ;  the  pillar  of  cloud 
by  day  and  of  fire  by  night ;  the  leprosy  of  Miriam ; 
the  fiery  serpents ;  the  cure  of  the  people ;  and  the 
burial  of  Moses  by  the  Lord  Himself:  all  these  things 
come  before  us,  in  a  form  which  obliges  us  either  to 
regard  them  as  supernatural  events,  or,  for  there  is  no 
medium,  as  pure  fictions— falsehoods  imposed  for  truth 
on  the  credulity  of  mankind ;  and  if  so,  they  are  fatal 
to  the  character  of  the  entire  book  in  which  they  are 
found. 

We  have  seen,  then,  that  the  Pentateuch,  however 
composed,  is  unquestionably  a  unity;  that  whether  it  is 
to  be  invariably  regarded  as  a  literal  record  of  events 


MANY   AUTHORS,    BUT   ONE   BOOK.  101 

or  not,  it  is  essentially  historic ;  that  its  morality  is  of 
the  highest ;  its  general  truthfulness  self-evident ;  its 
simplicity  and  beauty  unrivalled ;  and,  further,  that  it 
everywhere  involves  the  supernatural.  But  there  is 
nothing  that  can  make  against  the  supposition  that  side 
by  side  with  certain  distinct  and  positive  Divine  revela- 
tions, are  found  documents  providentially  selected  and 
edited,  but  not  inspired.  The  predictive  element,  if 
accepted  at  all,  obliges  us  to  admit  the  supernatural 
process  which  we  call  inspiration,  and,  in  so  doing,  the 
supernatural  element  generally.  The  narrative,  on  the 
other  hand,  however  historically  true,  need  not  for 
many  reasons  be  regarded  as  in  all  respects  infallible. 
Jewish  history,  notwithstanding  its  being  found  in  the 
Bible,  is  but  history  after  all,  and  must  be  judged  by  a 
very  different  standard  from  that  which  belongs  to 
directly  inspired  communications.  We  accept  it,  rather 
in  consequence  of  the  connection  in  which  it  stands, 
and  the  genei-al  character  of  the  book  in  which  it  is 
embodied,  than  on  account  of  any  direct  proof  we  can 
by  possibility  have  of  its  entire  accuracy. 

•  But  this  is  of  little  moment,  so  long  as  we  feel  confi- 
dent that  it  is  truthful,  and  can  regard  it,  in  that  char- 
acter, as  a  stable  foundation  for  what  follows.  Short  of 
an  absolute  denial  of  the  supernatural  in  all  its  forms, 
which  is  simply  to  deny  or  to  limit  God,  to  refuse  Him 
the  character  of  a  free  agent,  and  to  cut  Him  off  alto- 
gether from  direct  communication  with  the  creatures 
He  has  made,  it  is  impossible  to  find  any  good  or  rea- 
sonable ground  for  denying  the  general  credibility  of 
the  Pentateuch.  But  so  long  as  we  retain  belief  in  a 
God  at  all — that  is  to  say,  in  a  personal  God,  having  a 


102  LIBER   LIBEOEUM. 

charaeter,  and  therefore  capable  of  being  known  and 
loved — the  possihility  at  least  of  the  supernatural  must 
be  admitted.  On  the  other  hand,  '  If  Christianity  be 
true  historically,  its  miracles  included,  and  if  indeed 
"  Christ  rose  from  the  dead  according  to  the  Scriptures," 
then  the  writings  which  bring  such  facts  as  these  to  our 
knowledge  will  take  a  place  of  authority  in  our  mind 
and  conscience  which,  practically,  and  as  to  their  influ- 
ence in  determining  our  faith  and  our  conduct,  must  he 
very  nearly  the  same^  lohatever  'may  be  the  theory  or  the 
opinion  we  adopt  among  the  many  that  have  been 
advanced  concerning  inspiration^^ 

That  the  later  historic  portions  of  the  Bible  are  based 
upon  the  Pentateuch,  that  they  presuppose  the  authority 
of  the  books  of  Moses,  will  probably  not  be  disputed. 
Joshua  at  Shechem  recapitulates  the  leading  events 
therein  related  as  the  well-known  national  history  of 
the  people  he  is  addressing.  Others  in  after  times  take 
the  same  course.  Not  a  hint  of  the  possible  untrust- 
worthiness  of  these  traditions  or  documents  is  to  be 
found  anywhere.  On  the  contrary,  they  are  always 
regarded  as  sacred,  and  they  are  preserved  for  the  most 
part  with  a  veneration  which  sometimes  degenerates 
into  superstition. 

Equally  obvious  is  it  that  the  same  characteristics 
which  belong  to  the  earlier  documents  distinguish  those 
that  follow.  The  message,  whatever  it  may  be,  is 
always  identical  in  tone  and  spirit  with  that  of  the  five 
books.  The  voice  of  the  one  is  the  voice  of  the  other. 
The  historic,  the  didactic,  the  predictive  and  the  mira- 
culous all  in  turn  reappear,  and  as  a  rule  under  the  same 
^  The  Restoration  of  Belief,  p.  238. 


MANY  AUTHORS,  BUT  ONE  BOOK.       103 

conditions.  Nothing  can  be  plainer  than  that,  whether 
true  or  false,  the  later  documents  are  but  the  natural 
and  necessary  outgrowth  of  those  which  have  preceded 
them. 


CHAPTER   Y. 

JEWISH    HISTOEY    AND   PROPHECY. 

Jewish  history,  although  the  history  of  a  peculiarly 
governed  people,  and  therefore  of  times  in  which  God 
more  obviously  interfered  with  human  affiiirs  than  He 
now  does,  is,  as  has  been  already  observed,  but  history 
after  all ;  and  there  is  not  a  hint  in  Scripture  which 
should  lead  us  to  imagine  that  it  was  composed  under 
any  other  conditions  than  those  which  belong  to  the 
historian  everywhere,  who  seeks  and  finds  providential 
guidance  in  his  work. 

We  have  a  riglit,  indeed,  to  suppose  that  the  men 
who,  under  a  theocracy,^  were  officially  called  to  write 
or  to  edit  the  transactions  of  the  nation,  -were  truthful 
men,  honourable  and  honoured  by  their  countrymen, 
and  endowed  with  high  talent  if  not  with  special  gifts 

*  *  Under  a  theocracy.'' — This  phrase  is  often  supposed  to  imply 
more  than  it  really  does.  The  theocratic  form  of  government  under 
which  the  Jews  long  lived  by  no  means  involved  either  a  continual 
miraculous  interference  on  their  behalf,  or  preservation  from  any  of 
the  errors  to  which  mankind  are  liable.  Eather  was  it  such  a  pre- 
sence among  them  as  admitted  the  possibility — whenever  they  were  in 
a  right  state  of  mind — of  the  will  of  God  being  ascertained  on  any 
given  question.  When  they  neglected  or  ceased  to  care  for  Divine 
direction  it  was  obviously  withheld.  Scripture  affords  abundant 
proof  that  even  before  the  monarchy  the  people  were  often  left  to 
their  own  devices. 


JEWISH    HISTORY    AND    PKOPnECY.  105 

from  above.  We  know  that  some  of  them  were  so. 
Samuel,  Nathan,  Gad,  Isaiah,  and  Jeremiah,  although 
sometimes  historians,  were  also  prophets,  men  richly 
endowed  with  high  moral  and  spiritual  qualifications. 
Of  Iddo,  Ahijah,  and  Shemaiah  ;  of  the  men  who  wrote, 
or  compiled,  or  condensed  from  more  extended  records, 
the  books  of  the  Kings  and  Chronicles,  we  know  less. 
But  of  this  we  are  assured,  that,  whether  accomplished 
by  Ezra  or  by  any  other  hand,  the  grand  outline  we 
have  of  the  history  of  the  ancient  people  is  a  compilation 
from  documents  long  since  lost;  drawn  up  doubtless 
for  religious  ends  and  under  the  guidance  of  a  wise 
Providence,  but  never  pretending  to  the  character  of  a 
Divine  revelation.  It  is  surely  but  wilfulness  or  folly 
to  give  to  these  records,  invaluable  as  they  are,  a 
character  which  they  themselves  do  not  claim,  or  to  say 
of  them,  what  has  never  been  said  of  any  other  history, 
that  ever)"  particular  must  be  infallibly  true,  or  the  en- 
tire document  is  false  and  worthless. 

That  some  of  these  books  embody  Divine  revelations 
is  clear  enough,  if  we  accept  as  truthful  the  frequently 
recuriing  declaration,  '  Thus  saith  the  Lord,'  or  '  The 
Lord  said  unto  me,'  phrases  which,  when  connected 
with  direct  communications  from  above,  must  certainly 
be  understood  to  imply  that  the  speaker  claims  Divine 
authority  for  what  he  is  saying,  and  this  not  the  less 
because  similar  expressions  are  at  other  times  not  unfre- 
quently  used  in  a  lower  sense,  viz.  as  indicating  that  the 
writer  or  speaker  believes  himself  to  be  uttering  that 
which  is  in  accordance  with  the  Divine  will.  Instances 
of  such  use  may  be  found  in  the  address  of  Joshua 
(xxiv.  2)  where  he  is  plainly  recapitulating  history,  and 
6* 


106  LLBEK   LIBRORUM. 

again  in  the  speech  of  Jotham  (Jiidg.  ix.  6-8).  David 
also  in  speaking- of  Shimei  exclaims,  'The  Lord  liath 
said  unto  him,  Curse  David'  (2  Sam.  xvi.  10),  evidently 
meaning  the  Lord  permitted  him  thus  to  act.  Some  of 
the  books,  indeed,  such  as  those  of  Esther  and  of  Ruth, 
contain  nothing  which  could  not  have  been  written 
without  special  assistance  by  any  competent  person 
acquainted  with  the  facts  ;  yet  these  books  are  essential 
to  the  completeness  of  Scripture,  and  as  such  are  greatly 
to  be  prized.  To  insist  that  they  are  inspired  adds 
nothing  to  their  value.  It  is  but  to  maintain,  what 
every  page  of  Holy  Scripture  contradicts,  that  God 
works  miraculously  when  ordinary  agencies  are  every 
way  adequate  to  the  accomplishment  of  the  end  sought. 

There  is  not,  within  the  whole  compass  of  Scripture, 
a  word  to  show  that  Jewish  history  is  inspired  in  the 
only  sense  in  which  that  word  ought  to  be  used,  viz.  in 
the  sense  of  the  writers  liaving  what  they  wrote  super- 
naturally  revealed  to  them,  and  their  being,  as  a  conse- 
quence, infallible.  The  marvellous  fidelity  with  which 
the  faults  and  the  crimes  of  the  greatest  and  best  of  the 
kings  are  recorded,  however  humbling  to  the  individual 
whose  life  is  described,  or  to  Israel  as  a  nation,  certainly 
indicates  in  the  writers  a  subjection  to  truth  and  to  God 
perhaps  nowhere  else  to  be  met  with  ;  but  this  is  no  evi- 
dence of  Divine  inspiration,  inasmuch  as  that  which 
they  were  called  upon  to  record  was  not  the  result  of 
any  special  Divine  communication,  but  related  to  matters 
within  human  cognizance,  and  therefore  attainable  by 
care  and  industry. 

We  have  said  that  '  Jewish  history,  notwithstanding 
its  being  found  in  the  Bible,  is  but  history  after  all  *" 
^  Chap.  iv.  p   101;  and  also  chap.  v.  p.  104. 


JEWISH    HISTORY   AND   PROPHECY.  107 

and,  so  far  as  the  facts  themselves  are  concerned,  this  is 
true.  It  must  not,  however,  be  forgotten  that  the  annals 
in  question  differ  from  all  others  in  a  particular  which 
frequently  involves  the  presence  of  an  inspired  element. 
They  not  only  narrate  facts  —they  reveal  motives  ;  they 
sometimes  assert  that  such  or  such  a  transaction  took 
place  for  reasons  which  could  only  be  known  to  the 
Searcher  of  Hearts  ;  they  profess  at  other  times  to  tell 
us  authoritatively  hoio  such  transactions  were  viewed  by 
God,  and  what  relation  they  had  to  the  secret  history, 
the  sins  or  the  follies  of  the  actors. 

In  ordinary  history  these  things  are  concealed.  The 
motives  which  have  led  a  man  to  any  given  course  of 
conduct  may,  indeed,  often  be  surmised^  but  they  cannot 
be  knoicn.  The  light  in  which  a  particular  action  is 
viewed  by  the  Divine  Being  may  frequently  be  inferred 
from  what  we  know  of  His  character ;  but  inasmuch  as 
acquaintance  with  many  circumstances  connected  with 
its  performance  are  almost  always  out  of  our^reach,  the 
inference  may  be  a  wrong  one.  To  God  alone  it  belongs 
to  weigh  spirits  and  to  discern  the  thoughts  and  intents 
of  the  heart.  With  Him,  therefore,  exclusively  rests  the 
ability  to  form  just  judgments,  or  at  least  to  be  assured 
that  they  are  so. 

In  Jewish  history  no  room  is  left  for  doubt  of  this 
kind.  There  the  most  secret  thoughts  of  a  man  are, 
not  always  indeed,  but  oftentimes,  unveiled  ;  the  most 
plausible  pretences  are  laid  bare,  and  the  most  positive 
decisions  are  given  as  to  the  moral  quality  of  the  trans- 
action recorded.  In  such  cases  we  arc  left  in  no  uncer- 
tainty as  to  the  view  God  takes  of  an  action,  or  as  to 
the  judgment  He  pronounces  upon  it. 


108  LIBER   LIBKORUM. 

All  this,  of  course,  implies  that  however  human  or 
fallible  the  narrative  itself  may  be,  inspiration  is  more 
or  less  diffused  throughout  every  pai-t  of  sacred  history 
which  is  intended  to  shoio  forth  the  living  God  moving 
and  acting  for  definite  ends  among  the  children  of  men. 

But  this  is  not  all.  These  annals  teach  us  much  that 
otherwise  we  could  not  know.  They  reveal  to  us  the 
great  truth  that  not  in  Judea  only,  but  in  all  the  world, 
God  is  ever  present ;  that  whether  we  discern  His  Hand 
or  not.  His  power,  His  wisdom,  and  His  love  are  per- 
petually manifested  in  the  lives  both  of  nations  and  indi- 
yiduals ;  that  a  great  Divine  purj^ose  runs  through  the 
ages  ;  that  the  Controller  of  all  human  affairs,  however 
apparently  silent,  is  never  absent  from  the  world  He 
has  created,  never  regardless  of  what  is  going  on  upon 
its  surface. 

Without  this  light  we  should  not  have  been  able  to 
discern  the  Divine  working  in  many  cases  where  it  is 
now  quite  obvious  to  us  ;  we  should  frequently  have 
failed  to  arrive  at  either  wise  or  safe  conclusions  regard- 
ing many  things  that  are  now  made  plain;  we  should 
perhaps  have  doubted  altogether  whether  the  Lord  was 
indeed  ruling  among  the  nations. 

It  is  this  diffused  element  in  the  Bible  that  gives  to 
the  Book  the  importance  it  possesses.  It  is  this  breath- 
ing of  the  Divine — a  peculiarity  shared  by  none  other — 
that  justifies  the  Kegal  demand  it  makes  on  the  submis- 
sion of  men  to  its  decisions.  Nothing  is  more  certain 
than  that  if  we  study  the  Old  Testament  aright  we  shall 
find — as  Mr.  Maurice  well  says  in  his  dedication  to  Mr. 
Erskine  of  a  series  of  admirable  sermons  on  the  Prophets 
and  Kings,  which  he  published  about  fifteen  years  ago 


JEWISH    HISTORY    AND    PKOPIIECY.  109 

— that  therein  is  to  be  read  '  an  interpretation  of  some 
of  the  greatest  difficulties  in  history,  and  in  the  condi- 
tion of  the  world  around  us.' 

We  must  not  omit  to  observe  that  tliere  appears 
throughout  the  history  a  sjyirit  of  prophecy  lohich  by  no 
7neans  involves  Divine  inspiration^  and  which  is  quite 
distinct  fi-om  that  power  of  predicting  future  events 
which  belonged  to  so  many  of  the  Hebrew  seers.  Debo- 
rah, Hannah,  Saul,  nay,  whole  schools  of  prophets,  from 
time  to  time  appear  upon  the  scene;  some,  'like  the 
wife  of  Lapidotli,  who,  in  her  song  over  Sisera,  strangely 
intermingling  human  passion  with  Divine  thanksgiving, 
expresses  the  popular  feeling  without  much  regard  to 
the  propriety  or  impropriety  of  the  sentiments  uttered  ; 
some,  like  the  youthful  warrior  who  chants  his  ode  on 
the  dead  Saul,  apparently  blinl  to  the  eri'ors  of  the 
departed  king,  and  attributes  to  his  hero  qualities  par- 
taking far  more  of  poetic  license  than  of  literal  truthful- 
ness ;'  some,  like  Hannah,  rising  out  of  rejoicings  over 
personal  mercies 'into  noble  strains  wherewith  to  recount 
the  goodness  of  Him, '  who  keepeth  the  feet  of  His  saints, 
breaketh  in  pieces  His  adversaries,  and  exalteth  the  horn 
of  his  anointed  ;'  others,  like  the  crowd  who  gathered 
about  Ahab  at  Samaria  and  bade  him  go  up  to  Ramoth 
Gilead,  are  spoken  of  as  filled  with  a  lying  spirit,  prophe- 
sying for  mere  gain,  'a  crust  of  bread;'  sewing  'pil- 
lows under  the  arm-holes'  of  the  people,  and  deluding 
them  to  their  ruin.  Here  at  least  any  inspiration  from 
above  is  out  of  the  question. 

Not  so  with  other  portions.  As  we  advance  we  come 
in  contact  with  ruling  men  who,  like  Elijah,  Elisha,  and 
other  less  known  seers,  are  obviously  the  commissioned 


110  LIBER   LIBROEUM. 

servants  of  the  Most  High,  bidden  to  speak  before  kings 
and  peoples  in  words  not  their  own,  but  God's,  and 
called  for  the  most  part  to  seal  their  testimony  with 
their  blood.  By  these  the  faults  both  of  the  people  and 
their  rulers — their  idolatries,  their  cruelties,  their  super- 
stitions— are  unsparingly  exposed,  and  the  calamities 
that  retributively  followed  their  sins  are  always  recog- 
nised as  Divine  judgments,  and  fulfilments  of  Mosaic 
predictions  such  as  those  with  which  the  book  of  Deu- 
teronomy closes. 

The  constant  theme  of  these  men  is,  '  To  what  pur- 
pose is  the  multitude  of  your  sacrifices  unto  me  ?  saith 
the  Lord.  Wash  you,  make  you  clean  ;  put  away  the 
evil  of  your  doings  from  before  Mine  eyes  ;  cease  to  do 
evil;  learn  to  do  well'  (Isa.  i.  11-17).  Whenever  cere- 
monial rites  are  put  in  the  place  of  truth  and  duty  they 
refuse  to  be  silent.  Kings,  priests,  and  people  by  turns 
receive  rebuke  at  their  hands,  in  everything  the  true 
prophet  showing  himself  to  be  the  messenger  of  God. 
'  Is  not  this  the  fast  that  I  have  chosen  ?  to  loose  the 
bands  of  wickedness,  to  undo  the  heavy  burdens,  and  to 
let  the  oppressed  go  free,  and  that  ye  break  every 
yoke?'   (Isa.  Iviii.  5,  6.) 

Further,  there  rims  through  the  prophecies  of  these 
men  a  long  series  of  predictions,  which  can  by  no 
alchemy  whatever  be  interpreted  otherwise  than  as 
relating  to  a  distant  future  and  to  a  coming  King  under 
whom  the  world  should  be  happy.  Xor  is  it  easy  to 
sever  this  great  monarch  from  '  the  seed  of  the  woman ' 
that  was  to  bruise  the  head  of  the  serpent' ;  from  that 
descendant  of  Abraham  in  whom  'all  the  nations  of  the 
earth '  were  to  be  blessed ;    or  from  the  prophet  whom 


JEWISH    HISTORY    AND    PROPHECY.  Ill 

the  Lord  said  unto  Moses  He  would  '  raise  up  of  his 
brethren '  like  unto  Him. 

It  is  this,  and  the  good  time  connected  therewith, 
which  imparts  so  peculiar  a  tone  and  color  to  all  Hebrew 
prophecy.  It  is  this,  as  Dean  Stanley  truly  says,  that 
'gives  to  the  Bible  at  large  that  hopeful,  victorious, 
triumphant  character  which  distinguishes  it  from  tlie 
morose,  querulous,  narrow,  and  desponding  spirit  of  so 
much  false  religion  ancient  and  modern.  "  To  one  far 
off  Divine  event  the  whole  creation  moves."'  That 
event — the  restoration  and  happiness  of  the  race  under 
Messiah — is  the  ever-recurring  theme  of  the  Jewish 
prophets.  With  a  striking^  prediction  of  the  glorious 
time  when  this  '  Sun  of  Righteousness  shall  rise  with 
healing  in  His  wings '  the  last  of  the  seers  closes  at 
once  his  own  message  and  the  Old  Testament. 

Need  it  be  said  that  such  predictions  if  not  '  God- 
breathed  '  are  worse  than  useless.  Professing  to  be,  in 
the  highest  sense.  Divine,  they  are  either  truly  so,  or 
else  mere  outbursts  of  frantic  and  fraudulent  enthusiasm. 
If  the  former,  the  very  words  are  the  words  of  holy  men, 
speaking  '  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.'  If 
the  latter,  language  has  no  terms  strong  enough  where- 
Avith  to  denounce  such  wicked  and  mischievous  impostors. 

These  prophecies  may  occasionally  be  very  obscure 
or  veiy  coarse ;  they  may  at  one  time  descend  to  a 
familiarity  that  stai-tles  us,  and  at  another  rise  to  a  sub- 
limity that  is  actually  overpowering  ;  it  may  often  be 
exceedingly  difficult  to  separate  the  voice  which  refers 
to  its  own  day,  from  that  which  points  to  a  far  distant 
future  :  but  whether  clear  or  dark,  whether  familiar  or 
sublime,  whether  referring  to  the  near  or  to  the  distant, 


112  LIBEPw    LIBKOKUM. 

they  stand  alone ;  as  compositions  iinmatclied ;  in 
beauty  without  a  rival ;  in  purity  unapproachable :  at 
once  terrible  and  tender ;  often  mystic  and  mournful, 
yet  ever  redolent  of  joy  and  triumph. 

The  Psalms  occupy  a  position  of  their  own.  The 
Psalter  is,  as  Tholuck  says,  the  book  from  which  '  Piety, 
whether  Jewish  or  Christian,  if  genuine,  has  derived 
more  nourishment  than  from  any  other  source.  In  the 
greater  portion  of  reformed  churches  they  serve  as 
spiritual  songs ;  the  Catholic  priest  daily  prays  them  in 
his  breviary ;  and,  bound  with  many  editio*ns  of  the 
New  Testament,  they  form  the  book  of  devotion  of 
Protestants.  When  our  Lord  instituted  the  Holy  Sup- 
per, He  sang  psalms  with  His  apostles.  He  testified  to 
His  disciples  that  the  tiaits  of  His  fate  were  delineated 
in  the  Psalms.  He  referred  His  opponents  to  a  pro- 
phetic psalm  as  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  Tlie  extent 
to  which  His  humiliation  and  exaltation  were,  mirror- 
like, beheld  by  Him  in  the  Psalms  may  be  illustrated  by 
the  fact  that,  even  on  the  Cross,  when  expressing  the 
desertion  of  His  soul,  He  used  not  His  own  words,  but 
adopted  the  language  of  His  typical  ancestor." 

In  this,  as  in  other  poetic  books,  all  historic  references 
accord  with  previously  recognised  documents.  The 
doctrine  or  ethics  of  the  Psalms  is  in  exact  accordance 
with  that  which  had  preceded  them.  Herder  says, 
'  There  is  no  attribute,  no  perfection  of  God  left  unex- 
pressed in  the  simplest  and  most  powerful  manner  in 
the  Psalms  and  the  Prophets.'  Throughout  indeed  the 
Old  Testament  the  typical  or  prefigurative  continually 
appears,  '  every  pious  man  who  suffered  for  God's  cause 
^  Tholuck,  Introd.  to  Comm.  on  the  Psalms. 


JEWISH    HISTORY   AND   PROPHECY.  113 

under  the  ancient  economy,  but  triumphed  at  last,  being 
regarded  as  a  type  of  wliat  should  be  fulfilled  in  Christ ; 
just  as  the  entire  sacrificial  institutions  as  well  as  other 
j)henomena  have  a  like  reference.' 

But  does  it  follow,  if  this  typical  character  be  ad- 
mitted, that  every  book  in  which  it  is  found  must  be 
from  first  to  last  inspired  of  God  ?  We  cannot  see  why 
this  should  be  assumed.  That  the  Bible,  in  consequence 
of  the  pecuharity  of  its  structure;  its  mysterious  unity  ; 
the  perpetual  murmur  of  the  Infinite  which  is  ever  issu- 
ing from  its  pages ;  in  its  revelations  and  in  its  reti- 
cence ;  in  what  it  says  and  in  what  it  withholds,  is 
singularly  unlike  any  other  book,  cannot  be  disputed. 
That  the  Divine  breath  animates  it  as  a  whole ;  that  the 
Divine  mind  has  controlled  its  formation,  just  as  the 
same  Divine  mind  controls  and  regulates  all  our  afl^airs ; 
that  just  as  each  separate  human  life,  while  perfectly 
free,  is  yet  continually  directed  by  an  unseen  hand  (a 
thread  of  the  supernatural  running  through  it),  so  this 
written  embodiment  of  the  life  of  Humanity  growing 
through  the  ages,  is  moulded  by  One  who  has  made  it 
what  it  is,  is  certain.  But  how  this  fact  should  be  sup- 
posed to  carry  with  it  the  infoUibility  of  every  utterance 
in  the  sense  of  perfect  accuracy  as  to  dates  and  num- 
bers, and  absolute  approval  of  every  action  recorded 
which  is  not  distinctly  disclaimed,  it  is  assuredly  diffi- 
cult to  see. 

Paley  justly  observes,  '  This  is  to  make  Christianity 
answeiable  with  its  life  for  the  circumstantial  truth  of 
each  separate  passage,  the  genuineness  of  every  book, 
and  for  the  information,  fidelity,  and  judgment  of  every 
writer  in  it.' 


CHAPTER    VI. 


THE     NEW     TESTAMENT. 


That  the  New  Testament  opens  upon  us  as  a  develop- 
ment of  the  Old  can  scarcely  be  denied  by  any  honest 
man.  When  John  the  Baptist  appears,  his  message  is, 
*  Repent,  for  the  kingdom  of  God  is  at  hand/  But  no 
one  asks  the  question,  '  What  kingdom  ?'  because  they 
fully  understood  him  to  be  speaking  of  that  which  had 
so  long  formed  the  theme  of  prophetic  anticipations. 
Their  views  regarding  this  kingdom  might  be,  as  they 
certainly  were,  in  many  respects  very  defective ;  for  they 
looked  forward  to  it  apart  altogether  from  any  moral  or 
spiritual  change,  and  supposed  that  it  would  be  '  of  the 
earth  and  earthy.*  Nevertheless,  it  was  this  gospel  of 
the  kingdom,  purified  indeed  from  carnality,  and  con- 
nected with  the  resurrection,  that  the  Apostles  were 
directed  to  preach,  first  to  the  Jew,  and  then  to  the 
Gentile;  themselves  ever  living  by  faith  in  the  happy 
expectation  of  the  Redeemer's  return,  to  '  build  again 
the  tabernacle  of  David,  and  to  set  it  up,  that  the  residue 
(the  rest  or  remainder)  of  men  might  seek  after  the 
Lord' (Acts  XV.  16-17). 

Everywhere  in  the  New  Testament,  directly  or  in- 
directly, the  authority  of  the  great  lawgiver  is  recog- 


THE   NEW   TESTAMENT.  115 

nised.  Rites  and  institutes,  circumcision^  and  the  sab- 
bath, the  passover  and  the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  all 
commemorate  events  which,  if  they  never  occurred, 
could  not,  by  any  possibility,  have  become  national 
memorials.  The  legislation  of  the  land  is  in  great 
measure  that  of  the  wilderness ;  to  honour  Moses  is  to 
every  Jew  living  in  apostolic  days  the  first  of  duties; 
to  be  a  child  of  Abraham  the  highest  of  privileges.  All 
this  of  course  supposes  that,  at  that  time,  the  Pentateuch 
was  regarded  as  historic,  in  the  sense  of  being  trust- 
worthy. 

Christ  Himself  distinctly  declares  that  He  came  not 
to  destroy  the  law  and  the  prophets,  but  to  fulfil 
them.  He  always  refers  to  the  Old  Testament,  and 
especially  to  the  Pentateuch,  as  the  recognised  history 
of  the  people.  '  Have  you  never  read,'  He  asks,  on  one 
occasion,  '  what  God  said  to  Moses  at  the  bush  ?'  On 
another, '  What  did  Moses  command  you  ?'  On  a  third, 
'  If  ye  believed  Moses  ye  would  believe  on  Me  ?'  The 
Flood,  the  destruction  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  the 
falling  of  the  manna,  the  giving  of  the  law,  the  eleva- 
tion of  the  brazen  serpent,  are  each  and  all  referred  to 
in  the  New  Testament  as  well-known  facts ;  and  Noah, 
Lot,  Jonah,  David,  Job,  Balak,  Balaam,  and  others,  are 
mentioned  as  historical  personages. 

*  '  Circumcision.'' — This,  although  peculiarly,  was  Tiot  exclusively 
a  Jewish  rite.  It  has  been  found  to  prevail  extensively  both  in 
ancient  and  modern  times.  It  is  all  but  universal  among  Mohamme- 
dans. It  belonged  to  the  Jew  as  to  no  other  people,  by  its  haviug 
been  appointed  or  adopted  as  a  sign  of  the  covenant  God  made  with 
Abraham.  [t  was  practised  in  Egypt,  but  not  during  the  forty^ 
years'  sojourn  in  the  wilderness  (Josh.  v.  5). — Smith's  Dictionary. 


116  LIBER   LIBRORUM. 

Stephen^  in  his  defence,  recapitulates — although,  as  we 
have  it,  apparently  not  with  perfect  accuracy — Jewish 
history.  Paul,  before  Agrippa,  insists  that  he  was  only 
teaching  the  approach  of  what  Moses  and  the  prophets 
had  said  should  come.  In  his  address  to  the  Jews  he 
reminds  them  how  God  called  them  out  of  Egypt.  In 
his  epistles  he  refers  to  the  lowly  origin  of  the  nation — 
to  '  the  hole  of  the  pit '  out  of  which  it  was  digged.  He 
reminds  them  how  the  serpent  beguiled  Eve ;  how 
Abraham  met  Melchisedek ;  how  the  law  was  given  to 
Moses  ;  how  they  were  baptised  unto  Moses  in  the  cloud 
and  in  the  sea ;  how  they  lusted  in  the  wilderness  ;  how 
they  drank  of  the  rock  that  was  smitten  ;  how,  from 
Abel  downwards,  the  just  had  lived  by  faith.  Peter,  in 
like  manner,  refers  to  the  Deluge,  to  the  conduct  of  Lot, 
and  to  that  of  Balaam.  John  speaks  of  Cain  and  Abel. 
James  of  Abraham.  Jucle  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah ; 
while  the  imagery  of  the  Apocalypse,  when  narrowly 
examined,  is  found  to  be  a  curiously  wrought  piece  of 
Mosaic  made  up  from  the  older  prophets. 

The  same  facts  and  doctrines  everywhere  reverberate. 
The  elements  which  combine  in  the  New  Testament  are 
precisely  the  same  as  those  which  characterise  the  Old. 
The  historic,  mingling  with  the  didactic,  runs  through 
the  Gospels,  the  Acts,  and  the  Epistles.  The  predictive 
is  seen  in  the  message  of  the  angel  to  Mary;  in  the  song 
of  Elizabeth ;  in  the  teachings  of  the  Baptist ;  in  the 
savings  of  the  Lord,  and  in  that  wondrous  prophecy 
which  concludes  the  book.  The  supernatural  appears 
in  miracles  without  end,  wrought,  not  only  by  Christ 
and  His  apostles,  but  also  by  their  more  immediate 
converts. 


THE    NEW    TESTAMENT.  117 

Nor  is  the  raorality  of  the  New  Testament,  as  has 
frequently  been  asserted,  different  from  that  of  the  Old. 
The  ancient  commandment  is  but  developed  and  spi- 
ritualised by  the  Lord  Jesus.  Nothing  is  superseded 
but  that  which  had  been  ordained  or  modified  in  order 
to  meet  for  a  time  the  peculiar  condition  of  a  half 
civilised  people.  Tliese  ordinances,  whether  relating 
to  slavery  or  divorce,  to  j^olygamy  or  concubinage,  to 
judicial  retaliation,  or  to  an  exclusive  nationality,  being 
temporary  in  character,  and  borne  with  for  a  time  in 
order  to  avoid  greater  evils,  were  to  pnle  and  pass  away 
before  the  higher  light  brought  in  by  the  Redeemer  of 
the  world.  But  it  is  monstrous  to  speak,  as  some  do, 
of  the  God  of  Moses  as  being  different  or  inferior  to  the 
God  of  Isaiah,  or  of  both  suffering  eclipse  before  the 
God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

God  is  One,  and  His  character  is  One ;  but  man  varies 
with  circumstances ;  and  according  to  those  circum- 
stances God  deals  with  him  ;  giving  truth,  like  every- 
thing else,  only  as  men  are  able  to  bear  it,  and  ndapting 
His  enactments  to  conditions  under  which  higher  forms 
of  law  would  be  impracticable,  and  the  attempt  to 
enforce  them  would  only  lead  to  greater  mischiefs  than 
legislation  could  rectify.  In  this  sense  the  Mosaic 
dispensation  is  a  different  dispensation  from  that  of 
Christ,  its  rules,  promises,  and  system  being  different, 
though  the  Author  and  the  End  of  both  dispensations 
is  the  same. 

Other  elements,  equally  characteristic,  might  be 
traced  running  through  the  ichole  volume^  were  it  needful 
to  point  them  out.  One  in  particular  may  be  noticed, 
viz.,  the  greater  favour  shown  to  some  above  others.    We 


118  LIBER   LIBEORTJM. 

are  accustomed  to  call  these  jDreferences  instances  of 
Divine  sovereignty,  simply  because  they  exhibit  to  us 
God  acting  in  a  way  we  do  not  quite  understand,  and 
loithout  giving  us  any  reason  for  what  He  does.  The 
acceptance  of  Isaac  and  the  rejection  (though  not 
without  a  blessing)  of  Ishmael ;  the  choice  of  Jacob 
over  Esau  even  before  birth — though  Esau  has  His 
blessing  too  ;  the  selection  of  Joseph  to  be  ruler  over 
Egypt  and  the  saviour  of  his  family  ;  of  Judah,  to  be 
eventually  the  governing  tribe ;  the  elevation  of  Saul ; 
the  subsequent  choice  of  David :  these,  and  many  other 
instances,  clearly  indicate  a  great  purpose  running 
through  the  ages,  in  which  men  are  but  the  instruments 
of  higher  power. 

In  the  New  Testament,  this  exercise  of  Di\ine  sove- 
reignty rises  into  a  doctrine — that  of  election — and  is 
expounded  as  such,  first  by  Christ  and  afterwards  by 
the  great  apostles  of  the  Gentiles.  Need  it  be  observed 
that,  as  a  great  fact  of  life^  explain  it  as  we  may,  the 
giving  to  one,  and  withholding  from  another  meets  us  at 
every  turn,  whether  we  recognise  the  hand  of  God  in  it 
or  not. 

Many  other  unities  might  be  noticed.  If  in  the  Old 
Testament  as  a  fact  Cain's  offering  is  rejected  because 
he  is  hating  his  brother,  in  the  New  the  doctrine  is  laid 
down,  man  must  first  be  reconciled  unto  his  brother, 
and  then  come  and  offer  his  gift.  If  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Abraham  fights  bravely  for  Lot,  while  Isaac 
yields  his  rights  ratiier  than  contend  for  them,  the  coun- 
terpart appears  in  the  teaching  of  the  later  dispensation, 
that  while  the  man  of  God  is  not  to  strive,  but  to  over- 
come evil  by  good,  the  soldier  may  remain  in  his  calling, 


THE   NEW   TESTAMENT.  119 

and  the  magistrate  is  not  to  bear  the  sword  m  vain. 
Under  each  dispensation  the  Jacobs  with  all  their  sins 
and  weaknesses  are  regarded  as  more  godly  than  the 
Esaus  with  their  rude  and  manly  virtues.  The  standard 
is  the  same  under  both  covenants;  in  each,  however, 
differing  very  widely  from  that  which  any  uninspired 
man  would  have  laid  down.  Wliy  a  life  of  faith  should 
be  accepted  as  covering  so  many  faults — explicable 
enough  to  the  spiritual  man — is  an  enigma  which  the 
world  never  could,  and,  on  its  own  principles,  never  can 
explain. 

Further,  of  all  in  the  Bible  that,  properly  speaking, 
constitutes  the  Word  of  God,  that  is,  the  written  Word, 
whether  found  in  the  Old  Testament  or  in  the  New, 
Christ  the  incarnate  Word  is  at  once  the  centre  and  the 
substance.  In  Him  it  is  all  embodied.  Around  Him 
all  that  is  written  radiates.  Some,  indeed,  have  asserted 
that,  in  a  certain  sense.  He  typifies  the  written  Word; 
that  the  human  element  in  Scripture  is  to  the  Book 
what  human  nature  was  to  the  Divine  Logos ;  that  in 
the  Word  written,  as  in  the  Word  made  flesh,  the  human 
and  the  Divine  meet  without  any  interference  with 
infallibility.  But  this  can  only  be  affirmed  of  those 
portions  of  the  Bible  which  really  coiistitute  Divine 
revelation.  In  these,  as  in  other  parts,  although  in  a  very 
different  sense,  there  is  a  human  element,  but  it  is  one 
which  in  no  way  interferes  Avith  infallibility.  In  Jewish 
history,  however  true  or  important  it  may  be,  nothing 
is  to  be  found  corresponding  to  that  union  of  the  Divine 
and  human  which  was  manifested  in  Christ. 

But  some  will  say.  This  is  too  general :  come  to  par- 
ticulars, and  tell  us  plainly  whether  or  no  you  regard 


120  LIBER   LIBRORUM. 

tlie  Gospels  as  inspired.  If  so,  is  it  in  whole  or  in  part  ? 
Further,  slate  distinctly  in  what  light  you  regard  the 
Acts,  the  Epistles,  and  the  Apocalypse. 

We  see  no  reason  to  object  to  such  a  question,  nor  do 
we  imagine  that,  on  the  principles  -already  laid  down,  a 
straightforward  reply  is  to  be  shunned.  Everything  in 
the  Gospels  that  properly  constitutes  a  revelation  is  un- 
questionably inspired.  The  discourses  of  the  Lord  must 
be  regarded  as  in  substance  accurately  reported,  how- 
ever words  may  vary,  if  we  believe  that,  in  accordance 
with  His  promise.  He  supernaturally  brought  all  things 
that  He  had  said  to  remembrance,  so  far  as  it  was  need- 
ful or  desirable  that  His  exact  words  should  be  record- 
ed. As  a  rule,  however,  it  suffices  for  all  practical 
purposes,  that  the  substance  or  rather  the  real  purport 
of  what  was  spoken  should  stand  for  what  was  actually 
said. 

The  facts^  or  what  are  stated  to  be  such,  are  to  be 
received,  like  all  similar  statements,  on  the  authority  of 
witnesses,  on  whose  veracity,  disinterestedness,  and 
good  sense,  not  a  shadow  of  doubt  can  rest.  Surely, 
then,  we  may  ap^^roach  the  evangelical  narratives  with 
at  least  as  much  respect  as  we  show  to  ordinary  writers. 
Surely  we  are  bound  to  peruse  them  with  at  least  as 
much  candour  as  we  are  accustomed  to  exercise  when 
dealing  with  the  productions  of  any  honourable  man, 
whether  living,  or  long  since  dead.  Yet  how  few  scep- 
tics are  prepared  to  do  this. 

The  miracles  recorded,  if  not  true  narrations  of  what 
actually  took  place,  serve  only  to  convict  the  reporters 
of  being  either  credulous  or  fraudulent  men,  in  which 
case  not  a  word  they  have  written  is  worthy  of  a  mo- 


THE   NEW   TESTAMENT.  121 

mentis  attention  from  any  sensible  person.  To  believe 
this,  however,  in  the  face  of  statements  so  calm,  unex- 
cited,  and  well  balanced  as  are  those  of  the  Gospels  ;  to 
associate  either  Aveakness  or  falsehood,  with  men  who 
suffered  and  died  in  defence  of  truth  as  truth  ;  who  lived 
above  all  the  conventionalities  of  their  day ;  who  had 
everything  to  gain  by  yielding  to  popular  prejudices  and 
to  authority  in  Clmrch  and  State ;  who  actually  lost 
everything,  even  life  itself,  by  disregarding  the  wishes 
and  commands  of  the  rulers :  to  believe  that  these  men 
were  after  all  mere  charlatans'  certainly  requires  an 
amount  of  credulity  greater  than  has  yet  been  mani- 
fested even  by  the  most  zealous  upholder  of  lying 
legends. 

The  genealogies  inserted  by  Matthew  and  Luke, 
copied  in  all  probability  from  the  public  records,  may, 
for  aught  we  can  tell,  be  now  quite  incapable  of  recon- 
ciliation. Matthew,  when  quoting  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, may  only  mean  by  the  phrase  '  then  was  fulfilled  ' 
that  then  again  became  applicable  the  words  of  the 
prophet.  What  are  sometimes  termed  '  obscure  and 
incomprehensible  prophecies '  in  the  New  Testament 
may  he  mere  allusions  to  passages  in  the  prophetical 
writings  which,  by  accommodation,  illustrate  the  events 
narrated.  '  The  writings  of  the  Jewish  prophets,'  it 
has  been  truly  observed  by  Mr.  Hartwell  Home,  '  were 
the  classics  of  the  later  Jews,  and  in  subsequent  ages^ 
all  their  writers  affected  allusions  to  them.'  Interpola- 
tions, although  of  small  importance,  7nay  here  or  there 
have  crept  into  the  text,  and  occasional  discrepancies 

'  See  some  observations  in  the  last  chapter — '  Postscript ' — on  ob- 
jections to  this  dilemma. 
6 


122  LEBER   LIBKOEIJM. 

can  unquestionably  be  pointed  out.  But  all  these  things 
become  of  little  or  no  consequence,  if,  recognising  the 
existence  of  a  human  element,  we  keep  in  mind  the 
great  purpose  for  which  the  Gospels  were  written. 
*  These  things  are  written  that  we  may  believe  that 
Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  that  believing 
we  might  have  life  through  His  name.'  He  who  knows 
that  this  was  the  end  for  which  the  Gospels  were  given 
may  well  feel  assured  that  the  means  were  adequate ; 
that  the  Giver  would  not  suffer  any  error  to  find  place 
in  them  which  could  interfere  with  the  attainment  of 
the  end  for  which  they  were  bestowed.' 

The  developments  of  doctrine  put  forth  after  Pente- 
cost, by  Paul  and  others,  whether  in  the  Acts  or  the 
Epistles,  their  advices,  commands,  and  exhortations, 
rest  on  the  same  foundation,  and  may  be  subjected  to 
the  same  conditions  as  other  portions  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. So  far  as  they  reveal  they  are  inspired.  So  far 
as  they  are  inspired  they  are  infallible.  Here,  too,  how- 
ever, the  human  element  appears,  as  when  Paul  appends 
to  a  letter,  evidently  written  under  Divine  inspiration, 
directions  as  to  sending  his  cloak  and  parchments ;  or, 
when  he  associates  with  authoritative  advices  regarding 
Church  matters,  the  counsel  to  Timothy,  '  Drink  no 
longer  water,  but  use  a  little  wine  for  thy  stomach's 
sake  and  thine  often  infirmities.'  And  not  in  these 
instances  only.  There  is  much  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul 
that  is  obviously  personal,  such  as  expressions  of  regard 
for  individuals,  sometimes  inserted  on  account  of  the 
writer  and  sometimes  on  behalf  of  others,  which  can  in  , 

^  For  further  observations  on  the  Gospels,  see  chap,  vii  *  The 
Canon.' 


THI-:   NEW   TESTAMENT.  123 

no  reasonable  sense  be  regarded  as  inspired.  It  is  quite 
otherwise,  however,  with  his  authoritative  teachini^. 
Here  he  stands  before  us  as  the  faithful  exponent  of  the 
Divine  Spirit.  The  fact  that  a  distinction  is,  in  one 
instance  at  least,  drawn  by  Paul  himself  between  speak- 
ing by  commandment  and  giving  counsel,  marks  the 
conscientious  integrity  of  the  man,  and  stamps  some 
other  portions  not  thus  separated  with  an  authority 
which  would  not,  under  different  circumstances,  be  so 
clear. 

Nor  should  the  jy^ogressive  character  of  the  teaching 
of  the  New  Testament — harmonising  as  it  does  in  this 
particular  too  with  the  Old — be  unnoticed.  Like  its 
predecessor,  it  advances  step  by  step  as  a  communica- 
tion from  God.  Christ,  who  is  its  Alpha  and  Omega, 
not  only  claims  to  have  received  from  the  Father  all 
He  taught,  He  distinctly  states  that  what  He  had  thus 
received  He  communicated  to  His  apostles.  'I  have 
given  unto  them  the  words  which  Thou  gavest  unto 
Me.' 

No  statement  can  be  more  explicit  or  more  authorita 
tive ;  for  it  at  one  and  the  same  time  extends  and  limits 
the  Divine  communication. 

It  extends  it  to  what  the  apostles  should  teach  after 
their  Lord's  departure ;  and  in  so  doing  it  assures  us  that 
we  may  rely  not  only  on  what  He  taught  them  while  in 
the  flesh,  but  on  what  He  communicated  to  them  after 
He  was  risen  and  glorified.  It  is  a7i  endorsement^  so  to 
speak,  of  that  which  was  ultimately  expanded  and  de- 
veloped by  them  in  their  epistles  to  the  Churches;  it  is 
an  authentication  of  that  mysterious  prediction  which 
concludes  the  whole. 


124  LIBER   LIBEOEHM. 

It  limits  Divine  teaching  to  the  men  who  received 
what  tbey  taught  directly  from  the  Lord.  It  does  more ; 
it  limits  them  to  the  expansion  of  that  teaching.  Hence 
the  substance  of  all  they  taught  is  involved  in  the  words 
of  Christ.  '  All  the  great  doctrinal  features  of  the  Epis- 
tles are  found  in  germ  in  separate  sayings  of  Christ.  All 
the  main  outlines  of  the  Apocaly|3se  are  given  us  in 
parables  and  sayings  which  trace  the  future  history  of 
His  kingdom.' 

The  New  Testament  thus  becomes,  like  the  Old,  from 
first  to  last  a  progressive  unity.  But  with  this  difference. 
'  There  progress  is  interrupted,  often  languid,  and  some- 
times so  dubious  as  to  seem  like  retrogression.  Here  it 
is  rapid  and  unbroken.  From  the  manger  of  Bethlehem 
on  earth,  to  the  city  of  God  coming  down  from  heaven, 
the  great  scheme  of  things  unrolls  before  us  without  a 
check,  without  a  break.' 

The  Apocalypse,  however  obscure  at  present,  or  how- 
ever much  it  may  have  been  abused,  is  either  Divinely 
iia spired  in  the  very  highest  sense,  or,  as  an  eminent 
sceptic  has  said,  it  is  '  the  most  worthless  book  that  was 
ever  placed  between  covers,'  But  '  Wisdom  is  justified 
of  her  children.'  'I  cannot  doubt,'  says  the  present 
Archbishop  of  Dublin,  *  that  a  day  will  come  when  all 
the  significance  of  the  Aj^ocalypse  will  be  apparent, 
which  hitherto  it  can  scarcely  be  said  to  have  been. 
When  the  great  drama  is  hastening,  with  even  briefer 
pauses,  to  its  catastrophe;  then,  in  one  unlocked  for 
way  or  another,  the  veil  will  be  lifted  from  this  won- 
drous Book,  and  it  wiU  be  found  strength  in  the  fires, 
giving  songs  in  the  night,  songs  of  joy  and  deliverance.' 

This  prophecy,  regarded  as  a  prediction  of  what  will 


THE   NEW   TESTAMENT.  125 

surely  one  day  come  to  pass,  is,  like  the  rest,  hound  up 
with  what  has  gone  before.  '  The  former  Scriptures  had 
revealed  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Saviour  not  only 
of  individual  souls,  but  also  of  the  "body,"  the  Church. 
The  Apocalypse  deals  with  this  Church  as  a  ichole,  and 
presents  it  as  a  society,  in  which  man  is  perfected,  and 
a  kingdom,  in  which  God  is  glorified.  The  sense  of 
sharing  in  a  corporate  existence,  and  in  a  history  and 
destinies  larger  than  those  which  belong  to  us  as  indi- 
viduals, tends  to  throw  the  mind  forward  upon  a  course 
of  things  to  come,  through  which  this  various  history  is 
to  run  and  these  glorious  destinies  to  be  reached.  When 
present  things  in  a  measure  disappoint  us,  we  turn  more 
eagerly  to  the  brighter  future.  Who  does  not  feel  in 
reading  the  Epistles  tliat  some  such  sense  of  present 
disappointment  grows  upon  him,  and  that  such  dark 
shadows  are  gathering  on  the  scene,  that  a  close  like 
that  of  the  Apocalypse  seems  to  have  been  demanded  V 
'  This  book,'  it  has  been  well  said,  'teaches  the  doctrine 
of  a  blessed  consummcttioii;  of  its  cause,  in  the  death  of 
Christ ;  of  its  history  and  of  its  nature ;  of  the  coming 
and  power  of  Him  whom  every  eye  shall  see ;  of  His 
victory;  of  the  judgment  of  evil;  and  of  the  great  and 
linal  restoration  of  all  things.  Here  all  the  hopes  of 
humanity  find  at  last  their  realisation — a  perfect  human- 
ity— perfect,  not  only  individually,  but  perfect  in  society. 
It  is  the  revelation  of  that  which  history  leads  us  to 
despair  of;  it  is  the  restoration  not  only  of  the  personal 
but  of  the  social  life  ;  it  is  the  creation  not  only  of  the 
man  of  God,  but  of  the  city  of  God.  Here  the  revealed 
course  of  redemption  culminates,  and  the  history  of  man 
is  closed ;  and  here,  in  these  last  chapters  of  the  Bible, 


126  LIBEE   LIBROKHM. 

the  unity  of  the  whole  Book  is  declared  by  the  comple- 
tion of  the  design  which  has  been  developed  in  its  pages, 
and  by  the  disclosure  of  the  result  to  which  all  preceding 
steps  have  tended.'^ 

While,  however,  the  recognition  of  a  human  element 
even  in  the  Xew  Testament  must  be  allowed,  and  may 
be  so  without  compromising  in  any  degree  either  the 
authority  of  Scripture  or  the  reverence  due  to  it  as  our 
guide  through  life,  it  is  far  otherwise  with  many  modern 
speculations  relating  thereto.  If,  as  we  have  been  told, 
the  Jewish  element  in  the  New  Testament,  that  link 
which  connects  it  with  the  past,  and  without  which  it 
would  be  isolated  and  unmeaning,  is  a  delusion ;  if  we 
pretend,  as  some  have  done,  that  our  Lord,  when  speak- 
ing of  His  '  kingdom,'  was  but  manifesting  the  effect  of 
Jewish  culture,  and  was,  so  far,  destitute  of  spiritual 
understanding;  if  we  deny  the  supernatural,  and  aflarm 
that  the  miracles  were  not  real ;  if  we  are  absurd  enough 
to  imagine  that  the  writers  of  the  Gospels  teach  filse- 
hood  'in  all  purity  of  intention;'  that  they  narrate  as 
fact  mere  vague  and  floating  traditions ;  that  they  only 
tell  us  things  '  as  they  conceived  of  them ;'  that  the 
words  of  the  Bible,  notwithstanding  their  falsity,  may 
be  regarded  as  true  words,  inasmuch  as  they  express 
'  the  conceptions  of  the  times,  and  the  measure  of  knowl- 
edge or  of  faith  to  which  every  one  of  the  writers  had 
in  his  degree  attained :'  then  we  had  far  better  abandon 
the  Book  at  once ;  for  if  this  be  its  character,  it  matters 
little  how  soon  it  may  fall  into  the  neglect  and  contempt 
it  so  richly  deserves. 

^  Bernard's  Bampton  Lectures  on  the  Progress  of  Doctrine  in  the 
New  Testament.     1864. 


THE    NEW   TESTAMENT.  127 

Having  thus — however  rapidly  and  imperfectly — 
traced  the  unity  which,  amid  diversity,  distinguishes 
the  various  tracts  of  which  the  Bible  is  composed,  let 
us  now  briefly  notice  the  process  by  which  these  trea- 
tises were  finally  brought  together  and  regarded  as  one 
book. 


CHAPTER    VII. 

THE    CANON. 

The  question  of  the  Canon — or  what  is  '  the  schedule, 
so  to  speak,  which  contains  the  books  of  Scripture ' — is 
a  very  different  one  from  that  of  the  inspiration  of  the 
Bible.  '  The  object  of  the  Canon,'  says  Dr.  Chalmers, 
'  is  simply  to  ascertain  what  are  the  actual  books  which 
should  be  received  into  this  collection  of  sacred  writings. 
We  may  allow  a  book  to  be  canonical,  and  yet  maintain 
opinions  of  all  sorts  and  varieties  in  regaid  to  its  inspi- 
ration.' It  is  important  to  keep  this  distinction  in  view. 
The  history  of  the  formation  of  the  canon  of  Scripture 
is,  without  doubt,  embarrassed  by  many  difficulties. 
That  of  the  Old  Testament  we  accept  from  the  Jews. 
When  or  how  it  was  formed  is  doubtful.  Popular  opin- 
ion assigned  to  Ezra  and  the  great  synagogue  the  task 
of  collecting  and  promulgating  the  Scriptures,  as  part 
of  their  work  in  organising  the  Jewish  Church.  Doubts, 
however,  have  been  thrown  upon  this  belief.  The 
authority  is  merely  traditional,  and  a  tradition  which 
also  regards  Ezra  as  having  '  rewritten  the  whole  of  the 
Old  Testament  from  memory,  the  copies  of  which  had 
perished  by  neglect.'  Still  it  is  but  reasonable  to  sup- 
pose that  the  people  on  their  return  from  exile  would 
greatly  desire  an  authoritative  collection  of  their  sacred 
books,  and  that  such  should  then  be  formed  is  the  more 


THE   CANON.  129 

likely  from  the  fact  that  the  assistance  of  prophets  could 
at  this  time  be  obtained,  Haggai,  Zechariab,  and  Mala- 
chi  being  cotemporary  with  Ezra  and  Kehemiah.' 

'  The  liistory  of  the  canon  of  the  New  Testame)it  pre- 
sents a  remarkable  analogy  to  that  of  the  Old.  The 
beginnings  of  both  are  obscure  from  the  circumstances 
under  which  they  arose.  Both  grew  silently  under  the 
guidance  of  an  inward  instinct,  rather  than  by  the  force 
of  external  authority;  both  were  connected  with  other 
religious  literature  by  a  series  of  books  which  claimed  a 
partial  and  questionable  authority;  both  gained  d^finite- 
ness  in  times  of  persecution.''*  In  neither  case  is  there 
any  reason  whatever  to  believe  that  the  work  was  ac- 
complished under  special  Divine  impulse  or  guidance. 
But  neither  the  value  nor  the  trustworthiness  of  the 
documents  is  lessened  by  the  absence  of  inspired  author- 
ity in  their  collection. 

Each  book  must  be  judged  by  Avhat  it  contains.  Most 
emphatically  is  this  true  of  the  Old  Testament.  As  alike 
canonical,  the  book  of  Judges  and  the  prophecies  of 
Isaiah  stand  side  by  side,  but  it  by  no  means  thence 
follows  that  the  contents  of  each  are  equally  divine. 
Tha  former  we  accept  simply  on  the  authority  of  Jewish 
tradition,  for  of  its  composition  we  know  nothing.  The 
book  evidently  embraces  an  historical  period  of  about 
350  years,  and  therefore,  if  not  given  by  immediate 
revelation  from  heaven,  ichich  there  is  not  the  least  rea- 
son to  supjwse,  it  must  have  been  compiled  either  from 
written  documents  or  oral  tradition,  or  from  both.     In 

\  See  Kitto's  Cyc,  art.  '  Ezra.' 

"  Art.  'Canon,'  in  Dr.  Smith's  Diet,  of  the  Bible,  by  the  Rev.  B.  F. 
"Westcott. 

6* 


130  LEBEPw    LIBEOEUM. 

aoy  case  the  possibility  at  least  of  legendary  exaggera- 
tion in  some  of  the  narratives  must  be  admitted ;  unless 
indeed  \re  assume  (for  doing  which  we  have  no  author- 
ity whatever)  that  God  absolutely  prevented  any  such 
admixture  as  inconsistent  witli  the  end  for  which  the 
book  was  written,  viz.,  to  show  that  the  Israelites 
brought  upon  themselves  the  calamities  under  which 
they  suffered  by  their  apostasy  and  idolatry.  The  latfer 
(the  prophecy  of  IsaLah)  carries  the  evidence  of  its 
divinity  in  its  own  bosom,  and  is  every  way  congruous 
with  later  revelations. 

No  such  diversity,  however,  belongs  to  the  books  of 
the  Xew  Testament.  The  four  Gospels  are,  with  good 
reason,  regarded  as  worthy  of  all  acceptation,  in  the 
character  of  authentic  and  credible  documents.  But  it 
is  by  no  means  easy  to  proce  that  they  are  so  to  the 
satisfaction  of  an  indifferent  observer.  The  originals,  in 
all  probability,  perished  at  a  very  early  period.  Xo 
autograph  of  any  one  of  them,  so  far  as  appears,  was  in 
existence  when  the  canon  of  the  Xew  Testament  was 
completed  ;  nor  do  we  read  of  anyone  who  had  ever  seen 
them.  Further,  it  can  scarcely  be  disputed  that,  for 
many  years,  the  Gospels  were  not  generally  kno^^'n  as 
the  productions  of  the  men  whose  names  they  bear.  It 
was,  without  doubt,  long  before  the  written  word  occu- 
pied any  position  at  all  resembling  that  which  it  now 
holds.  Xor  is  this  surprising.  For,  as  the  Gospel  had 
been  at  first  proclaimed  orally,  a  vivid  tradition  of  this 
teaching  would  naturally  take  the  place  of  any  book  or 
books  in  which  it  might  be  embodied.  Indeed,  for  the 
first  hundred  and  fifty  years,  the  apostohc  writings, 
although  in  separate  cu'culation,  do  not  seem  to  have 


THE    CANON.  131 

been  regarded  in  any  sense  as  forming  one  authoritative 
book.  The  first  catalogue  of  the  books  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture drawn  up  by  any  public  body  in  the  Christian 
Church,  which  has  come  down  to  us,  is  that  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  Laodicea  (a.  d.  365).  The  application  of  the  term 
Bible  to  the  collective  volume  of  the  sacred  writings 
cannot  be  traced  above  the  fourth  century.  Chrysostom 
adopts  it  in  his  second  homily.  He  adds  the  word 
fl.h'ine^  or,  as  we  should  now  express  it,  '  the  Holy 
Bible.'' 

Yet  it  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  the  genuineness 
of  these  narratives  rests  upon  evidence  better  than  that 
which  establishes  other  ancient  writings  that  are  received 
without  question.  They  were  all  composed  during  the 
first  century;  and  it  is  highly  pjrobable  that  they  were 
all  accepted  as  genuine  before  the  close  of  the  second. 
Irenaeus,  who  sufiered  martyrdom  a.  d.  202,  affirms  this 
to  have  been  the  case.  The  differences  between  the 
first  three  Gospels  and  the  fourtli  seem  to  find  a  natural 
explanation  in  the  fact  that  John,  writing  long  after  the 
othei^s.  purposely  abstained  from  recording  anew  what 
was  already  known  on  the  authority  of  his  predecessors. 
Whether  or  no  the  first  three  Gospels  were  compiled 
from  a  common  original,  or  whether,  to  some  extent,  the 
-^Titers  copied  from  each  other,  matters  little ;  each 
Evangelist  gives  us  his  own  personal  testimony  as  far  as 
it  went ;  and  if  they  had  alike  access  to  documents  sup- 
posed to  be  trustworthy,  each,  by  the  use  he  makes  of 
them,  gives  us  his  own  personal  testimony  to  the  accu- 
racy of  such  fragments.  But  all  this  is  mere  matter  of 
conjecture,    and   in  itself  comparatively   unimportant. 

*  Kitto's  CjcL  of  Bib.  Lit,  edited  by  Dr.  Lindsay  Alexander. 


132  LIBER   LIBEOEUM. 

Each  gospel  has  its  own  features,  though  all  conspire  to 
produce  an  harmonious  whole. 

The  only  important  question  is — How  far  may  the 
Gospels,  as  we  have  them,  be  relied  upon  as  truthful 
records  ?  and  the  answer  must,  to  a  great  extent,  turn 
upon  the  reception  or  rejection  of  the  internal  evidence 
they  offer  on  their  own  behalf;  much  of  course  de- 
pending upon  our  willingness  to  admit  t\\Q  iJossibiUty  of 
the  supernatural,  or  our  fixed  determination,  with  or 
without  reason,  to  beg  the  entire  question  by  refusing 
to  do  other  than  relegate  the  miraculous  to  the  domain 
of  fiction. 

Let  not  this,  however,  be  regarded,  as  closing  the 
question ;  for  other  evidence  is  not  altogether  wanting. 
The  literary  difiiciilties  which,  it  is  admitted,  exist  re- 
garding the  Gospels,  have  no  place  in  relation  to  some 
at  least  of  Sr.  Paul's  Epistle >.  The  genuineness  and 
authenticity  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  of  the 
two  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  are  not  disputed ;  and 
171  them  we  have  the  most  direct  and  unexceptional  evi- 
dence to  not  a  few  of  the  statements  given  us  in  the 
Gospels.  The  Death  of  Christ  and  His  Resurrection 
and  Ascension,  the  writer  asserts  partly  no  doubt  on  the 
testimony  of  others,  but  chiefly  from  what  he  believed 
to  be  a  direct  communication  from  the  Lord. 

If  Paul  v/as  not  a  deceiver — and  that  he  was  so 
nobody  pretends — the  great  facts  on  which  the  New 
Testament  turns  are  thoroughly  endorsed  by  a  man  of 
the  clearest  intellect  and  of  the  highest  character ;  the 
most  d  is  Interested  of  witnesses ;  the  most  richly  endowed 
of  all  who  have  professed  the  Christian  faith.  Nobody 
can  dispute — whatever  may  be  deduced  from  the  obser- 


THE   CANON.  133 

vation — that  the  Christ  of  Paul  and  the  Christ  of  the 
Gospels  are,  in  all  respects,  the  same ;  that  the  miracles 
of  the  one  correspond  to  the  miracles  of  the  other ;  and 
that  the  teaching,  whether  ethical  or  doctrinal,  is  identi- 
cal in  each.  Add  to  this  the  consideration,  already  re- 
ferred to,  which  Paley  places  at  the  head  of  so  many  of 
his  chapters,  and  it  seems  difficult  to  escape  the  conclu- 
sion that  these  occurrences  could  scarcely  have  been 
better  attested.^ 

Yet  all  this,  we  are  well  aware,  will  go  for  very  little 
with  men  in  whom  spiritual  sensibility  either  slumbers 
or  has  never  been  awakened.  There  miist  be  a  corre- 
spondence of  some  kind  between  the  giver  and  receiver 
of  a  testimony ;  there  must  be  a  faculty  in  exercise  for 
the  reception  of  truth,  answering  in  some  degree  to  the 
truth  presented,  or  no  effect  will  be  produced.  If  there 
is  nothing  loithin  a  man  which,  being  itself  supernatural, 
witnesses  to  Divine  revelation,  it  is  impossible  to  pro- 
duce in  such  a  mind  any  convictions  relating  thereto 
which  are  worth  having. 

Two  classes  of  persons  commonly  manifest  a  disposi- 
tion to  take  advantage,  for  the  furtherance  of  their  own 
designs,  of  admissions  like  those  which  we  have  felt 
compelled  to  make,  viz.  the  literary  sceptic,  and  the 
high  churchman.  The  first — the  sceptic — tells  us  that, 
on  our  own  showing,  he  is  justified  in  declining  to  place 
any  confidence  in  the  Gospels,  since  we  allow  that  he 
can  have  no  evidence  that  those  now  so  called  are  true 
copies  of  the  original  autographs.  He  argues  that,  as 
there  is  not  now  extant  any  manuscript  of  earlier  date 

^  This  point  has  recently  been  well  put  by  an  able  writer  in  the 
Saturday  Review. 


134  LIBEE   LIBKOEUM. 

than  the  fourth  century,  it  is  impossible  to  say  how  far 
interpolation,  subtraction,  or  addition  may  have  been 
carried.  He  affirms  that,  as  we  confess  we  have  now 
no  means  of  knowing  by  what  precise  rule  the  books 
supposed  to  be  divinely  inspired  were  distinguished 
from  merely  human  compositions,  the  supposed  authori- 
ty of  the  Gospels  rests  on  precisely  the  same  grounds  as 
the  infallibility  of  the  pope — that  of  popular  tradition. 
Finally,  he  makes  the  most  he  can  of  sundry  rash  state- 
ments found  in  books  *  on  the  evidences,'  and  so  con- 
cludes that  he  has  successfully  defended  his  unbelief. 
The  last — the  high  churchman — not  only  to  a  great 
extent  endorses  the  sceptic  in  his  conclusions,  but  mag- 
nifies, in  every  possible  way,  supposed  difficulties,  in 
order  to  prove  thereby  the  necessity  for  Church  au- 
thority. 

It  is  difficult  to  estimate  the  amount  of  mischief  that 
has  been  done  by  good  men  who  are  bent  upon  showing 
that  '  the  history  of  the  formation  of  the  canon  involves 
little  less  than  the  history  of  the  building  of  the  Catho- 
lic Church.'  Mr.  Westcott  would  not,  we  suppose,  for 
a  single  moment  place  Paul  and  Ignatius  on  the  same 
level,  and  yet  he  classes  them  together  in  telling  us  that 
'the  letters  of  Ignatius  complete  the  history  of  one  fea- 
ture of  Christianity ;'  that  'the  Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  the 
Ephesians,  his  pastoral  epistles,  and  the  epistles  of  Clem- 
ent and  Ignatius,  when  taken  together,  mark  an  harmo- 
nious progression  in  tlie  development  of  the  idea  of  a 
Church.'  He  allows,  indeed,  that  the  productions  of 
these  fathers  are  '  writings  of  which  no  exa.ct  type  can 
be  found  in  the  ISTew  Testament,'  for  '  they  exhibit  a 
spirit  of  order  and  organization  foreign  to  the  first  stage 


THE   CAI^ON.  135 

of  Christian  society ;'  but  he  does  not  see  in  this  import- 
ant admission  any  reason  for  the  rejection  of  the  letters. 
Surely  it  must  have  occurred  to  him  that  since  Ignatius 
was  a  cotemj^orary  of  Pliny  the  younger,  a  perusal  of 
that  eminent  man's  unquestioned  letter  to  the  Emperor 
Trajan  would  alone  be  sufficient  to  show  how  different 
was  tlie  character  of  early  Christianity  from  that  which 
is  presented  in  the  so  called  Ignatian  epistles. 

Dr.  Irons,  in  his  'Bible  and  its  Interpreters,'  labours 
to  overthrow  all  confidence  in  Scripture,  except  in  so 
f:ir  as  it  is  expounded  by  the  Church,  and  read  '  in  the 
light  of  tlie  creeds,  the  catechism,  and  the  liturgy.'  He 
regards  a  '  Book  revelation '  as  '  unreasonable  in  princi 
pie,'  forgetting  that  everything  to  which  man  attaches 
importance  he  desires  to  have  in  writing;  that  all  we 
know  of  history  comes  down  to  us  in  books ;  that  books 
live  when  tradition  dies,  and  that  letters  remain  un- 
changed when  institutions  have  altoo^ether  lost  their 
original  character.  And  all  this  he  does,  simply  that  in 
the  apparent  worthlessness  of  all  other  evidence,  the 
Church  may  lay  claim  to  the  absolute  submission  of 
men,  and  teach  them  to  say  in  every  diihculty — '  We 
know  this  to  be  so,  because  the  Church  has  so  told  us ; 
by  her  we  prove  all  things,  for  she  has  authority  in  con- 
troversies of  the  faith.' 

Surely  such  writers  might  with  advantage  be  reminded 
that  blind  submission  to  authority,  instead  of  being  flnth, 
renders  faith  impossible,  and  that  whenever  such  a  claim 
is  thoroughly  understood,  'the  deep  instinct  of  our  spir 
itual  being  rises  against  it ;  rises  as  a  spiritual  instinct 
of  self-preservation  against  that  entire  disinheriting  of 
us  as  God's  offspring  to  which  it  amounts."  Might 
'  M-Leod  Campbell:  Thoughts  on  Revelation. 


136  LIBER   LIEEOKUM. 

they  not  well  consider  whether  the  very  attempt  to 
throw  men  back  ui^on  the  authority  of  '  fathers '  whose 
writings  have  themselves  reached  us  in  most  questiona- 
ble shaj^es,  and  to  make  out  that,  if  we  accept  the  Gos- 
pels at  all,  it  must  be  in  reliance  on  the  judgment  or 
supposed  semi-inspiration  of  turbulent  assemblies  of 
bishops,  such  as  were  those  so  graphically  depicted  by 
.^ean  Stanley  in  his  lectures  on  the  Eastern  Churcli — 
men  who  but  too  often  exhibited  as  much  ignorance  as 
credulity ;  might  they  not,  indeed,  well  consider  whether 
the  very  attempt  to  do  tliis  is  not  to  betray  the  cause  of 
the  Bible,  in  order  to  exnlt  the  pretensions  of  the  Church  ? 

But  it  may  be  replied,  Is  not  this  after  all  the  truth 
of  the  matter  ?  Is  it  not  universally  admitted  that  the 
coimcils  of  Laodicea  and  Carthage  are  our  authorities 
for  the  New  Testament  canon?  To  a  certain  extent  it 
undoubtedly  is  so  ;  but  only  in  so  far  as  these  assemblies 
may  be  regarded  trustworthy  witnesses  to  the  fact  that, 
at  a  very  early  period,  given  documents  were  coinnionly 
received  as  genuine.  The  all-important  inquiry  is,  not 
what  the  councils  decided,  but  what  reasons  Christians 
had,  in  that  day,  for  accepting  certain  books  and  reject- 
ing others.  And  the  true  answer  will  probably  be  found 
partly  in  traditions,  which  were  then  comparatively 
fresh ;  and  partly  in  that  '  witness  of  the  Spirit  'to  the 
truths  embodied  in  the  accej)ted  books,  which  has  been 
in  all  ages,  and  still  is,  the  highest  evidence  to  their 
canonicity. 

The  apostle  John,  it  is  admitted,  lived  upwards  of 
thirty  years  after  the  production  of  every  apostolic 
writing,  except  his  own  apocalypse.  It  is  surely,  then, 
not  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  he  was  in  possession, 


THE   CANON.  137 

before  his  death,  of  all  inspired  productions,  or  that  he 
was  instructed  as  to  which  of  them  were  intended  for 
the  permanent  guidance  of  the  Church.  We  may  natu- 
rally wonder  that,  under  such  circumstances,  the  apostle 
did  not  furnish  for  publication  a  formal  and  complete 
list  of  books  which  ought  to  be  accepted ;  but  we  can 
gather  nothing  from  the  omission  to  do  so  beyond  this, 
that  so  fir  as  we  can  see,  it  was  not  on  the  whole 
deemed  desirable  that  the  thing  should  be  done.  The 
acquisition  of  truth  is,  in  all  its  stages  and  relations, 
2yrobationary  ;  and  no  unimportant  element  in  that  pro- 
bation is  the  pains  we  take  to  collect  evidence,  and  the 
mode  in  wliich  we  deal  .with  it  when  obtained. 

Polycarp,  who  was  a  disciple  of  John,  would,  one 
would  think,  be  sure  to  receive  from  his  aged  teachei 
such  information  as  Avould  enable  him  to  decide  w^hat 
writings  then  in  circulation  were  or  were  not  authorita- 
tive ;  and  Irenseus,  Avho  heard  Polycarp  preach,  would, 
in  all  probability,  obtain  from  the  martyr  or  from  his 
immediate  friends  information  so  likely  to  be  regulative 
of  his  teachino^.  From  the  time  of  Irenseas  it  is  ofene- 
rally  admitted  that  the  New  Testament  was  composed 
'essentially  of  the  same  books  as  we  receive  at  present, 
and  that  they  were  regarded  with  the  same  reverence 
as  is  now  shown  to  them.' 

If  this  be  true,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  its 
substantial  accuracy,  all  that  the  councils  would  have 
to  do  would  be  to  verify  these  things  and  to  act  upon 
them.  This  was  done  ;  but  in  doing  it,  and  in  publish- 
ing a  catalogue  of  the  books  then  held  to  be  inspired, 
these  assemblies  simply  bore  witness  to  the  general 
belief  of  the  existing  churches  that  such,  and  such  only, 


138  LIBER   LIBRORTJM. 

ought  to  be  accepted.  This  is  evident  from  the  fact 
that  some  books  were  received  into  the  canon  later  than 
others,  use  and  enquiry  combining  to  give  them  in 
course  of  time  their  proper  place.  Beyond  this  the 
councils  could  do  nothing  ;  for  the  men  who  there  met 
could  not  personally  know  more  about  the  matter  than 
we  do.  Like  Christians  of  the  present  day,  they  were 
not  insensible  to  the  internal  evidence  they  found  in 
favour  of  the  hooks  they  accepted,  or  to  their  accord- 
ance with  the  instincts  of  the  new  nature.  But  in  this 
particular  they  were  but  on  a  level  with  ourselves,  as 
we  again  are,  in  this  respect,  on  a  level  with  those  who 
spiritually  lived  on  Scripture,  long  before  its  books  were 
catalogued  or  any  council  had  decided  on  the  canon. 

Granting,  then,  as  we  readily  may,  that  in  the  very 
earliest  controversies  about  disputed  readings,  we  have 
no  evidence  of  any  appeal  having  been  made  to  apos- 
tolic originals  ;  granting  that  '  the  full  value  of  the 
Divine  gift '  was  not  at  first  known,  since  '  in  the  first 
age  the  written  word  of  the  apostles  occupied  no 
authoritative  position  above  their  spoken  word,  or  the 
vivid  memory  of  their  personal  teaching;'  admitting 
that  pretended  gospels  were,  at  one  time,  almost  count- 
less in  number,  we  are  stiil  by  no  means  driven  either 
to  renounce  the  authority  of  Scripture  or  to  fall  back 
upon  the  Church. 

It  is  easy  to  say.  How  can  I  accept  the  Gospels  we 
have,  unless  I  know  the  grounds  on  which  they  were 
accepted  and  other  writings  of  a  similar  character 
rejected?  But  it  is  not  sensible  to  do  so.-  We  do  not 
speak  thus  regarding  such  pretended  gospels  as  are  yet 
extant.     Why  do  we  not  ourselves  accept  the  so  called 


THE   CANON.  139 

'  Apocryphal  New  Testament,'  with  its  gospel  of  the 
infancy,  its  various  epistles,  its  shepherd  of  Hermas,  and 
such  like  productions  ?  Is  any  other  reply  needful  than 
this — They  condemn  themselves  ?  No  reasonable  per- 
son imagines  for  a  moment  that  any  one  of  these 
writings  can  compete  with  those  that  are  canonical. 
There  is  scarcely  room  for  a  doubt  or  a  question  either 
as  to  their  authority  or  their  value.  Why  may  we  not 
then  suppose  that  this  was  precisely  the  case  with  the 
e^arly  churches  ?  These  judges  give  no  reasons  for  their 
decisions,  simply  because  they  never  had  a  question 
recfardingr  the  claims  of  other  documents  which  even 
admitted  of  serious  discussion.  The  genuine  Gospels 
carry  their  own  evidence  with  them :  they  are  seen  to 
be  Divine  by  their  own  light.  But  this,  of  course,  im- 
plies that  true  Christians  have,  by  virtue  of  their  Chris- 
tianity, a  gift  of  spiritual  insight,  in  the  light  of  which 
they  can  separate  the  true  from  the  false. 

It  is  not  surprising  that  many  should  be  unprepared 
to  admit  this  ;  that  they  should  demand  objective  evi- 
dence;  that  they  should  be  altogether  unable  to  esti- 
mate the  force  of  that  which  is  purely  subjective  ;  that 
having  themselves  never  received  anything  which  the 
Gospels  reveal  into  their  hearts^  they  should  refuse  to 
do  more  than  stand  outside,  and  coolly  weigh  what  is  to 
be  said  in  favour  of  the  authenticity  and  inspiration  of 
Scri})ture  in  scales  of  their  own  making,  and  apart 
altogether  from  any  considerations  that  are  moral  and 
spiritual.  While  this  is  the  case,  such  persons  must 
remain  unsatisfied.  The  Bible  always  supposes  the 
existence  in  the  man  to  whom  it  speaks  of  a  spiritual 
faculty  having  affinity  with  its  revelations ;    and  this 

6* 


140  LIBER   LIBRORUM. 

being  the  case,  and  ordained  of  God,  it  is  vain  to  offer 
evidence  in  favour  either  of  the  miracles  of  the  New 
Testament  or  of  the  authority  of  the  Gospels  to  persons 
who  are  as  yet  quite  unprepared  to  estimate  that  Divine 
love  and  condescension  which  underlies  all.  *  My  sheep,' 
says  Christ,  '  know  My  voice.'  Only  in  this  way  is  it 
given  to  men,  as  Mr.  Tennyson  says, 

To  feel,  although  no  tongue  can  prove 
That  every  cloud  that  spreads  above 
And  veileth  love,  itself  is  love. 

To  the  man  who  accepts  the  Bible  because  he  recog- 
nises in  it  the  Divine  voice,  the  human  authorship 
becomes  a  matter  of  small  importance.  The  Gospels 
would  occupy  precisely  the  same  place  in  the  estimation 
of  such  a  man  as  they  now  do,  whatever  amount  of 
doubt  might  be  thrown  on  their  literary  composition. 
It  is  certainly  pleasant  to  feel  assured  that  the  Epistle 
to  the  Romans,  for  instance,  was  written  by  Paul,  but 
it  would  scarcely  be  less  valued  if,  like  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  its  authorship  were  uncertain.  To  say, 
therefore,  that  evidence  of  the  authorship  is  essential  to 
confidence  in  the  books;  to  affirm  that  if  the  Bible  is  not 
infallibly  accurate  in  every  particular,  it  does  not  differ 
from  other  writings ;  to  insist  that  it  ought  not  to  be 
received  as  a  Divine  revelation  unless  separate  proof  for 
the  inMlibility  of  each  distinct  portion  can  be  present- 
ed ;  to  pretend  that  if  an  erroneous  statement  can  be 
discoverep  in  any  part  of  the  volume  the  worthlessness 
of  the  whole  is  demonstrated :  is  simply  to  affirm  that 
under  no  conditions  whatever  shall  its  authority  be 
acknowledged;  that  any  truth  it  may  contain,  if  ac- 


THE    CANON".  141 

cepted  at  all,  must  be  accepted  only  because  it  is  capable 
of  being  proved  true  by  other  means ;  that  nothing  is 
to  be  received  as  true  merely  because  it  is  contained  in 
the  Bible. 

Yet  the  Book  lives.  And  in  spite  of  the  admission 
that  authority,  tradition,  and  literary  evidence,  all  go, 
more  or  less,  to  form  or  to  build  up  our  faith  in  it,  it 
remains  true  that,  apart  from  all  these  things,  learned 
and  ignorant  alike  *  have  hung  over  this  Book  as  with 
a  strange  fascination,  ever  since  it  was  known  to  be  put 
together  as  a  whole  ;'  some  dreading  it,  as  if  it  were  an 
enemy,  others  loving  it  as  the  dearest  and  best  of 
friends;  both  not  unfrequently  being  compelled  to  ex- 
claim, '  It  tells  me  all  things  that  ever  I  did.  Is  it  not 
from  God  ?'  This  is,  probably,  what  Coleridge  means 
when  he  says,  '  The  Bible  finds  me  in  a  way  no  other 
book  does.  I  do  not  so  much  find  it,  as  I  am  found 
of  it.' 

How  much  more  satisfactory,  say  some  men,  it  is  to 
rest  our  faith  upon  God  than  upon  documents !  Doubt- 
less it  is  so ;  but  before  such  a  dictum  can  be  accepted, 
in  the  sense  which  these  objectors  put  upon  it,  we  must 
be  informed  where  and  how  any  true  knowledge  of  God 
is  to  be  obtained,  if  the  documents  in  question  are  to 
be  either  rejected  or  ignored?  Let  us,  therefore,  in- 
stead of  yielding  to  dissatisfaction  with  the  mode  in 
which  God  has  been  pleased  to  reveal  Himself,  now 
apply  that  which  has  been  advanced  to  what  are  gen- 
erally regarded  as  difficulties  in  Scripture. 


CHAPTER    VIII. 

DIFFICULTIES    IX    THE    BIBLE. 

Difficulties  in  Scripture  are  of  various  kinds ;  some 
pertaining  to  the  letter,  and  others  to  the  spirit  or  sen- 
timent expressed  or  implied.  Those  in  the  Pentateuch 
which  are  supposed  to  involve  statements  that  are  un- 
scientific, or  otherwise  inaccurate,  may  surely  be  dis- 
posed of  by  considerations  already  advanced,  viz.,  that 
Scripture  was  not  written  for  the  men  of  the  nineteenth 
century  alone,  but  for  persons  altogether  unacquainted 
with  our  modern  science ;  that  some  things  recorded 
probably  involve  to  a  limited  extent  figures  of  speech  ; 
that  infallibility  in  regard  to  minor  matters  is  nowhere 
claimed  for  the  narratives  in  question. 

It  is  difficult  to  see  how  any  official  record  or  nar- 
rative of  well-known  facts  can  be  regarded  as  written 
under  Divine  inspiration,  without  lowering  the  term  to 
an  extent  that  altogether  changes  its  signification; 
unless  indeed  it  is  intended  to  imply  thereby  that  the 
writer  has  been  miraculously  preserved,  from  error,  and 
also  been  enabled  to  correct  any  mistakes  he  may  find 
in  the  documents  he  copies,  or  from  which  he  quotes. 
This  is  of  course  to  assert  that  Jewish  history,  in  all  its 
most  minute  particulars  is,  so  far  as  it  is  given  in  Scrip- 
ture, equivalent  to  a  directly  God-breathed  communica- 
tion, for  nothing  else  can  be  infallible. 


i 


DIFFICULTIES    IN   THE   BIBI-E.  143 

Those  who  hold  to  this  view  are,  however,  obliged 
to  allow  that  the  miracle  they  assert  has  not  been  pro- 
longed through  the  ages,  by  the  supernatural  preserva- 
tion of  the  Book  thus  composed  from  all  the  accidents 
to  which  written  records,  however  carefully  guarded, 
become  in  course  of  time  liable.  If  the  Book  had  been 
thus  preserved,  it  is  impossible  that  errors  such  as  those 
already  referred  to'  could  have  been  found  in  it.  But 
if,  as  is  evident,  this  has  not  been  done ;  if  it  was  not 
needful,  in  order  that  the  purposes  of  God  should  be 
accomplished,  that  a  perpetual  miracle  should  be  wrought 
for  the  preservation  of  the  document,  it  is  hard  to  see 
that  a  miracle  should  have  been  either  wrought  or  re- 
quired in  order  to  enable  honest  and  truth-loving  men 
who  lived  in  the  fear  of  God,  to  write  with  adequate 
accuracy  the  well-known  history  of  their  people.  All 
the  probabilities,  therefore,  if  we  bear  in  mind  the  estab- 
lished fact  that  God  never  works  a  miracle  needlessly, 
are  in  favour  of  the  supposition  that  no  such  miracle 
was  wrought ;  in  which  case  errors,  where  they  exist, 
must  be  attributed  either  to  the  original  imperfection 
of  the  writers,  or  to  the  carelessness  or  dishonesty  of 
later  transcribers. 

Difficulties,  however,  remain  which  cannot  thus  be 
disposed  of     These  arise — 

1.  From  the  observation  that  certain  transactions- 
attributed  to  judges  or  other  distinguished  personages — 
which  everyone  would  now  admit  to  be  immoral,  are,  in 
Scripture,  not  only  recorded  without  disapprobation, 
but  sometimes,  as  in  the  cases  of  Deborah  and  David., 
made  the  subject  of  song  and  thanksgiving.  The  actions 
'  Chap.  ii.  'The  Extent  of  the  Claim,'  pp.  18,  19. 


144  LIBER   LIBROETJM. 

of  Jael,  of  Raliab,  of  Ehud,  and  of  Samson  are  of  this 
character. 

2.  That  certain  practices,  such  as  the  putting  to  death 
of  the  Cauaanites,  slavery,  and  polygamy — the  latter 
distinctly  or  implicitly  condemned  by  Christ  and  His 
apostles — are  both  tolerated  and  legislated  for ;  while 
other  laws,  such  as  those  relating  to  witchcraft,  indicate 
nothing  better  than  superstitious  ignorance. 

3.  That  the  phrases,  '  Thus  saith  the  Lord,'  or  '  The 
Lord  said,'  are  sometimes  used  under  circumstances  that 
seem  to  involve  the  Divine  Being  in  acts  which  stand  in 
direct  contradiction  to  His  character  as  revealed  to  us 
in  Christ.  The  hanging  of  Saul's  seven  sons  before  the 
Lord  is  a  striking  instance  of  this  kind. 

4.  That  some  of  the  supposed  miracles  of  the  Old 
Testament  were  wrought  under  circumstances  which 
seem  to  be,  so  far  as  we  are  able  to  form  any  judgment 
on  the  subject,  altogether  unworthy  of  the  Creator  and 
so  far  out  of  harmony  with  other  displays  of  supernatu- 
ral power. 

5.  That,  even  in  the  New  Testament,  doctrines  are  by 
many  supposed  to  be  taught — such  for  instance  as  that 
of  election  and  the  eternal  sensitive  torment  of  unbe- 
lievers— which  are  inconsistent  with  declarations  found 
elsewhere  regarding  God's  love  to  His  creatures  and 
His  pitifulness  to  their  infirmities  ;  while  other  doctrines, 
like  that  of  the  Trinity,  appear  to  contradict  the  Divine 
Unity. 

6.  That  the  general  unintelligibility  of  Scripture, 
which  is  manifested  in  incessant  disputes  and  divisions 
as  to  what  the  Book  says^  forbids  the  belief  that  it  is  a 
message  from  God  to  man ;  since,  if  it  had  been,  what- 


DIFFICULTIES    IN   THE    BIBLE.  145 

ever  peculiarities  might  have  distinguished  it,  the  docu- 
ment itself  would  at  least  have  been  plain  and  unmis- 
takeable. 

To  each  of  these  points  it  is  essential  that  attention 
should  be  paid,  if  stumbling-blocks  are  to  be  removed 
out  of  the  way  of  honest  and  enquiring  minds.  We  take 
them  up  therefore  in  order  ;  and  in  so  doing  observe — 

1.  That  the  treachery  of  Jael,  the  deceit  of  Rahab, 
the  assassination  of  Eglon  by  Ehud,  and  the  savagery 
of  Samson,  are  simply  recorded  as  historical  facts.  The 
song  of  Deborah  by  no  means  carries  with  it  any  evi- 
dence that  what  Jael  did  had  the  Divine  approval. 
True,  the  poet  who  praises  her  was  a  prophetess,  and 
one  raised  up  to  judge  Israel  in  a  time  of  peculiar  de- 
pression ;  but  she  was  not  on  that  account  infallible 
either  in  her  conduct  or  utterances.  If  Peter,  the  first 
of  apostles,  had  to  be  withstood,  because  even  in  seek- 
ing to  promote  the  faith  of  Christ  he  was  to  be  blamed  ; 
if  John,  in  zeal  for  his  Master's  honour  did,  on  one  oc- 
casion at  least,  speak  not  knowing  what  spirit  he  was 
of,  why  should  we  fear  to  admit  that  Deborah,  on  this 
particular  occasion,  like  David  in  some  of  his  impreca- 
tory psalms,  manifests  patriotism  rather  than  piety,  and, 
carried  away  by  natural  enthusiasm,  prophesies  in  a 
spirit  which  is  not  Divine  ?  ^ 

'  Most  people,'  says  an  able  writer,^  '  have  felt  some 
perplexity  at  the  commendation  which  the  author  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  bestows  on  such  characters  as 
those  of  Samson  and  Jephthah,  of  Gideon  and  of  Barak. 
Certainly  these  men  are  not  such  as  we  should  have 

^  See  Yaughan's  Way  to  Rest,  sect.  iv.  pp.  125,  126. 
'  Art.  on  Dean  Stanley's  Jewish  History,  in  Praser's  Magazine. 
1 


146  LIBEK   LIBRORrM. 

expected  to  find  held  up  as  patterns,  eni'oUed  in  such 
a  band  of  faithful  servants  of  God  as  Abraham,  Isaac, 
Moses,  and  Samuel :  it  scarcely  accords  with  our  theo- 
ries of  inspiration  to  read  of  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
descending  upon  such  a  one  as  Samson  with  his  vices 
and  his  weaknesses,  and  prompting  him  to  his  wild  acts 
of  vengeance  on  his  own  false  friends  and  his  country's 
enemies  ;  arming  Gideon  for  the  punishment  of  Succoth 
and  Peniel ;  or  Jephthah  for  the  wholesale  slaughter  of 
the  Ephraimites.  Yet  so  speaks  the  sacred  narrative,  and 
the  inspired  commentator  is  not  afraid  to  acknowledge 
these  fierce  patriots  as  lights  of  God's  chosen  people,  as 
those  who  '  hy  faith  subdued  kingdoms,  obtained  pro- 
mises, waxed  valiant  in  fight,  turned  to  flight  the  armies 
of  the  aliens.'  It  is/b?*  their  faith  they  are  commended, 
and  it  may  be  truly  said  of  them  that  the  imperfection 
of  their  characters,  tlie  disorder  of  their  times,  set  forth 
the  more  clearly  the  one  redeeming  element  of  trust  in 
God  that  lurked  in  each  of  them,  and  through  them 
kept  alive  the  national  existence.  These  deeds  must 
surely  be  viewed  by  the  light  of  their  own  times  and 
their  own  race  ;  they  must  be  judged  according  to  their 
own  code  of  morals,  not  by  that  which  Christianity 
has  rendered  as  it  were  elementary  to  us.  Like  other 
Orientals,  they  were  profoundly  indifferent  as  to  the 
choice  of  means  when  they  had  succeeded  in  persuading 
themselves  that  the  end  to  be  obtained  was  the  will  of 
God.' 

Is  it  not  possible,  we  may  add,  as  Dean  Stanley  has 
suggested,  that  the  book  in  which  these  strange  things 
occur — that  of  the  Judges — has  been  given  to  us  '  with 
the  express  view  of  enforcing  upon  us  the  necessity 


DIFFICULTIES    IN   THE   BIBLE.  147 

which  we  are  sometimes  anxious  to  evade,  of  recog- 
nising the  Imman,  national,  let  us  even  add,  barbarian 
element  which  plays  its  part  in  the  sacred  history  ?' 

Those  who  hold  that  God  directed  the  Judges  in 
all  that  they  did  as  rulers  of  the  people,  are  of  course 
driven  to  assume  that  Jehovah  commanded,  or  dis- 
tinctly approved  every  one  of  the  acts  referred  to,  and 
then  rightly  arguing  that  no  deed  can  be  immoral 
which  God  justifies,  they  maintain  all  these  acts  to  be 
right.  This  course  would  be  very  reverential  and  praise- 
worthy were  it  quite  certain  that  what  they  assume 
is  true.  But  what  if  it  should  not  be  ?  Surely  the 
strongest  evidence  ought  to  be  forthcoming  that  God 
did  actually  command  these  things  to  be  done,  and  that 
the  book  in  which  they  are  recorded  was  God-breathed, 
before  we  are  required  to  admit  that  the  Divine  Being 
ever  did  or  ever  will  command  His  children  to  do  any- 
thing that  He  has  Himself  taught  them  to  be  wrong. 
Yet  this  is  just  the  very  evidence  that  is  wanting. 

2.  The  difficulties  supposed  to  arise  out  of  the  mas- 
sacre of  the  Canaanites  and  the  permission  of  slavery 
have  already  been  dealt  with.^  It  is  not  therefore  ne- 
cessary to  revert  to  them  again.  The  permission  of  an 
evil  like  polygamy,  under  the  circumstances  then  pre- 
vailing, is  not  so  very  difficult  to  account  for,  if  it  be 
recollected  that  in  all  His  dealings  with  the  children  of 
Israel  the  Lord  never  disregarded  the  customs  of  the 
time  in  which  His  people  lived,  or  ever  set  aside  any 
surrounding  influence  which  was  not  morally  destructive 
to  them.  The  laws  given  from  time  to  time  were  not 
always  ordained  because  they  were  abstractly  the  best, 
'  See  Correspondence,  *  Reply  to  the  Doubter,'  pp.  32,  33. 


148  LIBER    LIBROEIIM. 

but  as  being  the  best  they  under  the  circumstances 
could  bear.  Some  of  them  were  avowedly  temporary, 
and  some — as  the  Sabbatic  year  for  instance — appear  to 
have  been  rarely  if  ever  carried  out.  In  the  wilderness, 
where  but  little  flesh  was  eaten,  they  were  forbidden 
to  slay  any  animal  for  food  except  at  the  door  of  the 
Tabernacle  (Levit.  xvii.  l-V).  In  Palestine,  or  rather 
just  before  they  entered  it,  this  law  was  superseded  by 
a  distinct  permission  to  kill  and  eat  flesh  anywhere 
(Deut.  xii.  15-27).  Polygamy  and  concubinage  seem 
to  have  been  allowed  only  to  prevent  greater  evils,  just 
as  slavery,  which  existed  universally,  was,  as  we  have 
seen,  in  the  interests  of  humanity,  modified  in  Israel  to 
an  extent  unknown  anywhere  else. 

Of  the  sorcery  and  witchcraft  referred  to  in  various 
parts  of  §cripture  we  know  little  or  nothing  beyond 
the  fact  that  its  practice  was  a  crime  punishable  by 
death.  That^  however,  as  Mr.  De  Quincey  has  well 
observed,  *  does  not  argue  any  Scriptural  recognition  of 
witchcraft  as  a  possible  ofience.  An  hnaginary  crime 
may  imply  a  criminal  intention  that  is  not  imaginary ; 
but  also — which  much  more  directly  concerns  the  in- 
terests of  a  state — a  criminal  purpose  that  rests  upon  a 
mere  delusion  may  work  by  means  that  are  felonious 
for  ends  that  are  fatal.  At  this  moment  we,  the 
English  people,  have  laws,  and  severe  ones,  against 
witchcraft,  viz.  in  the  West  Indies  ;  and  indispensable 
it  is  that  we  should.  The  Obeah  man  from  Africa  can 
do  no  mischief  to  one  of  us ;  the  proud  and  enlightened 
white  man  despises  his  arts ;  and  for  hiin^  therefore, 
these  arts  have  no  existence,  for  they  work  only  through 
strong  preconceptions  of  their  reality,  and  through  trem- 


DIFFICULTIES    IN    THE   BIBLE.  14cO 

bling  faith  in  their  efficacy.  But  by  that  very  agency 
they  are  all-sufficient  for  the  ruin  of  the  poor  credulous 
negro,  and  he  has  perished  by  a  languishing  decay 
thousands  of  times,  under  the  knowledge  that  Obi  had 
been  set  for  him.  Justly,  therefoi-e,  do  our  colonial 
courts  punish  the  Obeah  sorcerer,  who,  though  an  im- 
postor, is  not  the  less  a  murderer.' 

'Now,  the  Hebrew  witchcraft  was  probably  even 
worse  than  this ;  equally  resting  on  delusions,  it  never- 
tlieless  equally  worked  for  unlawful  ends,  and  it  worked 
through  idolatrous  agencies,  for  all  the  spells,  the  rites, 
the  invocations,  were  pagan.  The  witchcraft  of  Judea, 
therefore,  must  have  kept  up  that  connection  with 
idolatry  which  it  was  the  unceasing  effort  of  the  Hebrew 
polity  to  exterminate  from  the  land.'  ^  It  must,  how- 
ever, be  admitted  that  there  is  a  mystery  about  all  the 
Satanic  action  referred  to  in  the  Bible,  which  we  are  as 
yet  unable  to  solve.  That  a  belief  in  sorcery  prevailed 
among  the  Jews  even  in  our  Lord's  time  is  evident  from 
the  Pharisees  accusing  Jesus  of  working  His  miracles 
by  the  power  of  Beelzebub ;  and  the  very  little  we  our- 
selves know  about  the  invisible  world,  either  of  angels 
or  demons,  may  well  restrain  us  from  hasty  dogmatism 
on  such  a  subject. 

The  folly  and  sin  of  our  forefathers  in  burning  sup- 
posed witches  consisted  not  in  the  mere  persuasion 
— however  destitute  of  reason — that  sorcery  was  2)0S- 
sihle^  but  in  their  superstitious  and  selfish  dread  of  evil 
powers ;  their  silly  credulity ;  and  their  atrocious  cruelty 
towards  those  whom  they  ought  to  have  pitied  and 

^  De  Quiucoy's  Miscellanies,  vol.  viii. 


150  LIBER   LTBEOEUM. 

assisted.  In  order  to  disbeliev^e  in  witchcraft,  it  is  not 
necessary  to  become  a  Saddiicee. 

3.  The  question  whether  all  that  is  attributed  to  God 
in  the  Old  Testament  can  confidently  be  asserted  to 
have  been  done  by  Him,  is  one  that  will  be  answered  in 
the  affirmative  or  otherwise,  according  as  we  admit  or 
refuse  to  admit  the  possibility  of  interpolation ;  accord- 
ing to  the  interpretation  we  put  upon  the  words  '  Thus 
saith  the  Lord  ;'^  according  as  we  hold  to,  or  abandon, 
the  plenary  inspiration,  and  consequent  infallibility  of 
every  statement  made  in  the  Bible.  It  is  surely,  to  say 
the  least  of  it,  very  improhahle  that  when  Saul  in  his 
pride  and  rashness  had  on  one  occa'=iion  adjured  the 
people,  saying,  'Cursed  be  the  mm  that  eateth  any  food 
until  the  evening  that  I  may  be  avenged  on  mine  ene- 
mies,' the  Lord  should  not  only  -withhold  an  answer 
from  the  priest  because  Jonathan  had  ignorantly  and 
therefore  innocently  disobeyed,  but  first  signify  by  the 
lot  that  Jonathan  should  die  for  the  sin,  and  then  sufier 
the  people,  in  indignant  defiance  of  the  decision,  to  res- 
cue him.  Yet  so  it  stands  (1  Sam.  xiv.),  and,  so  stand- 
ing, all  but  proclaims  aloud  that  in  some  part  of  the 
narrative  there  is  error. 

It  is,  as  we  have  already  said,  perhaps  impossible  for 
us  to  know  how  far  a  Uahillti/  to  mistake  or  to  evade  a 
Divine  communication,  whether  given  V)y  voice  or  vision, 
wns  incurred  by  him  who  i-eceived  it.  But  it  may 
safely  be  asserted  that  all  the  probabilities  are,  that  not 
only  to  the  ancient  prophet,  but  to  everyone  who  re- 
ceived such  intimations,  a  Divine  message  was  always 
probationary ;  and  this  in  the  sense  that  all  action^ 
^  See  Correspondence,  '  Reply  to  tlie  Donbter,'  pp.  35-39. 


DIFFICULTIES   IN   THE   BIBLE.  151 

whether  on  the  mind  or  heart  of  man  by  the  Spirit  of 
God,  is  still  probationary — that  is  to  say,  capable  of 
being  misunderstood,  resisted,  or  absolutely  rejected  by 
a  i)roud  or  rebellious  spirit.  Faith  and  humility  must 
surely  have  found  as  much  room  for  exercise  then  as 
they  now  do ;  and  if  so,  only  by  an  unction  from  above 
was  the  Divine  message  or  warning  understood  or  re- 
garded. 

Further,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind,  that  among  the 
Israelites,  phrases  implying  a  direct  appeal  to  heaven 
were  commonly  used  when  no  such  communications 
really  took  place.  Seeking  an  ordinary  decision  at  law 
is  in  this  way  called  enquiring  of  God.  Moses  says 
(Exod.  xviii.  15),  'The  people  come  unto  me  to  enquire 
of  God.''  The  following  verse  explains  to  us  in  what 
sense  this  phrase  was  used,  for  he  adds,  *I  judge  be- 
tween one  and  another,  and  I  do  make  them  know  the 
statutes  of  God  and  His  laws.'  Moses,  as  a  wise  legis- 
lator and  administrator,  was  undoubtedly  in  these  cases 
the  representative  of  God ;  but  to  assume  that  because 
this  Avas  the  case  every  separate  decision  of  his  was 
infallible,  or  that  God,  so  to  speak,  was  responsible  for 
all  His  servant  did,  is  surely  but  an  extravagance. 

That  Judea  was  governed  theocratically,  in  a  sense 
altogether  peculiar  and  exceptional,  cannot  reasonably 
be  doubted  if  Israelitish  history  be  accepted  as  true. 
The  heathen  nations  around  them  might,  as  they  did, 
claim,  like  the  Jew,  to  unite  the  secular  and  the  reli- 
gious in  their  government;  they  might  boast,  as  they 
sometimes  were  accustomed  to  do,  of  the  power  of  their 
gods,  and  of  their  intervention  on  their  behalf;  they 
miij^ht  resort  to  omens  and  auOTries  as  a  means  of  ascer- 


163  "  LIBER   LIBRORUM. 

taining  the  will  of  superior  divinities  ;  but  to  Judea 
alone  belonged  the  reality  of  which  all  these  things  were 
but  deceptive  shadows.  For  them  as  a  nation,  and  on 
behalf  of  their  national  interests,  God  did  at  times  un- 
questionably interfere,  although,  strange  as  it  must 
seem  to  us,  the  most  marked  interference  seems  often  to 
have  had  little  or  no  corresponding  effect  on  the  minds 
of  the  people.  'The  great  mass  of  them  went  about 
their  daily  occupations  with  probably  neither  more  nor 
less  reference  to  the  Divine  Being  than  the  masses  of 
the  English  people  do  at  this  day.'  The  more  religious 
few  were  then,  as  they  ever  have  been,  whether  among 
Jews  or  Gentiles,  a  small  minority. 

Bearing  in  mind  these  conditions — liability  to  error 
arising  from  moral  causes,  on  the  part  of  the  recipient, 
and  the  possihility  of  interpolation — we  may,  I  think, 
safely  and  without  irreverence^  deny  the  authority  of  all 
statements  which  assert  that  God  ever  did  command 
any  act  which  is  obviously  alien  to  His  character  as 
revealed  in  Christ ;  and,  further,  that  this  may  be  done 
without  the  slightest  danger  of  thereby  rejecting  any 
portion  of  inspired  Scripture. 

The  sacrifice  of  Saul's  seven  sons  (2  Sam.  xxi.  8)  cer- 
tainly appears  to  be  so  contrary  to  all  that  God  has 
made  known  of  Himself  elsewhere,  that  it  may  well  be 
questioned  whether  this  portion  of  the  narrative  is  not 
altogether  an  interpolation.  The  story,  as  it  stands, 
asserts  that  a  three  years'  famine  having  distressed  the 
land,  David  enquired  of  the  Lord  in  order  to  ascertain 
the  reason  of  so  terrible  a  punishment;  that  the  Lord 
answered  him  by  stating  that  it  wns  a  judicial  infliction 
on  accoant  of  Saul  having  at  some  period  or  other  of 


DIFFICULTIES    IN   THE   BIBLE.  153 

his  history,  for  we  knoA7  not  when,  in  his  zeal  for 
Israel,  sought  to  shiy  the  Gibeonites  (Josh.  ix.  3-27). 
In  order  to  placate  the  Divine  anger  on  account  of 
this  evil  design  on  the  part  of  the  dead  monarch,  the 
seven  sons  of  Saul  are  said  to  have  been  hung  up  unto 
the  Lord  in  Gibeah,  after  which  God  was  entreated  for 
the  land. 

The  question  is,  not  so  much  whether  this  act,  what- 
ever maybe  its  character,  actually  took  place,  as  whether 
God  did  actually  command  or  approve  of  it. '  That  it 
is  utterly  unlike  everytliing  else  recorded  of  Jehovah 
is  clear.  Which  course,  then,  is  most  reverent?  To 
assume  its  truth,  as  divines  generally  do,  and  then  con- 
fess our  inability  to  judge  of  its  rectitude — David  having 
sworn  to  Saul  that  when  he  reached  the  kingdom  he 
would  not  cut  off  his  seed  (1  Sam.  xxiv.  20-22) — or  to 
question  whether  it  may  not  be  an  interpolation  ?  Of 
course  we  cannot  prove  that  it  is  so ;  but  inasmuch  as 
no  one  doubts  that  some  few  passages  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament have  been  thus  wrongfully  introduced,  and  there- 
fore form  no  part  of  Scripture,  it  is  at  least  possible  that 
such  y;i«y  have  been  the  case  with  some  portions  of  the  Old. 

^  The  Rev.  David  Jas.  Vaughan,  in  a  sermon  on  '  The  Moral 
Difficulties  of  the  Bible,'  suggests,  regarding  this  transaction,  that 
David  was  probably  deceived  by  the  priest  who  answered  as  from 
the  Lord.  '  It  is  for  Saul,  and  for  his  bloody  liouse,  because  he  slew 
the  Gibeonites.'  That  suspicion,  he  says,  '  is  increased  when  we 
remember  that  the  priest,  to  whom  David  must  have  apphed,  would 
be  that  Abiathar,  who  alone  hal  escaped  from  the  bloody  massacre 
of  the  priests  at  Nob,  which  Saul  in  a  fit  of  brutal  passion  had  com- 
manded, and  who  would  be  sure  to  entertain  feelings  of  the  deepest 
hatred,  and  a  truly  Oriental  thirst  for  revenge  against  Saul  and  his 
house.' 

1* 


154  LIBEK    LIBEOErM. 

That  it  is  justifiable  occasionally  to  resort  to  conjec- 
ture m  Old  Testament  criticism  can  scarcely  be  denied 
Dr.  Davidson's  remarks  on  this  head  are  both  moderate 
and  judicious.  '  The  step  is,'  he  says,  '  sometimes  un- 
avoida.ble.  In  consequence  of  the  paucity  and  youth  of 
all  Hebrew  manuscri[»ts,  the  uncritical  state  in  which 
the  oLJest  and  best  versions  are  found,  and  the  compara- 
tive poverty  of  external  evidence  as  a  whole,  added  to 
the  great  extent  of  the  Old  Testament  books,  and  the 
remote  times  from  which  they  have  been  handed  down, 
the  necessity  of  applying  critical  conjecture  in  the  case 
of  the  Old  Testament  becomes  apparent.  Yet  it  should 
be  used  sparingly.  The  only  rule  respecting  its  appli- 
cation is,  when  a  pressing  necessity  arises  let  it  be 
adopted.'  And  surely  no  necessity  can  be  greater  than 
that  which  presents  itself  when  anything  is  attributed 
to  God  that  is  contrary  to  the  revelation  He  has  made 
of  Himself  in  other  parts  of  the  written  Word.  Such  is 
the  case  before  us. 

Mr.  Home,  indeed,  tells  us,  in  the  '  Critical  Introduc- 
tion,' that  the  corruption  of  the  Old  Testament  by  the 
Jews  was  morally  impossible.^  But  no  assertion  can  be 
more  extravagant.  That  it  has  been  subjected  to  at 
least  the  same  risks  as  the  Xew  Testament  cannot  be 
doubted,  and  if  interpolation  can  be  ^^rouec?  to  have 
taken  place  in  but  a  single  instance  in  the  one,  it  is  by 
no  means  improbable  that  it  may  have  been  effected 
in  the  other.  And  this  may  be  admitted  without  at 
all  either  denvinor  or  undervaluincr  the  remarkable  care 
which  has  been  taken  of  the  books  as  a  whole,  or  their 
providential  preservation  by  God. 

'  Crit.  Int.,  3rd  edition,  vol.  i.  p.  117. 


( 


DIFFICULTIES    IN   THE   BIBLE.  155 

'How  often  the  sejDarate  books  were  transcribed,  or 
with  what  degree  of  correctness,  it  is  impossible  to  tell. 
We  cannot  suppose  that  the  Old  Testament  writmgs 
were  perfectly  free  from  alterations  in  the  earliest  times. 
It  is  probable  that  they  had  been  deteriorated  even  in 
the  interval  between  their  origin  and  the  completion  of 
the  canon.  All  analogy  confirms  this  supposition.'  It 
is  granted  that  '  the  Palestinian  Jews  were  very  scrupu- 
lous in  guarding  the  text  from  innovation ;  although  it 
is  impossible  that  they  could  have  preserved  it  from  all 
corruption.'  It  seems  impossible  to  doubt  that  oppor- 
tunities for  interpolation  would  easily  enough  be  found 
between  the  times  of  Ezra  and  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  it  is  matter  for  thankfulness  that  '  the  opera- 
tions of  sacred  criticism  have  proved  that  there  is  no 
material  corruj^tion  in  the  Divine  records ;  that  all 
doctrines  and  duties  remain  unaffected  by  its  investiga- 
tions ;  and  that  during  the  lapse  of  so  many  centuries, 
the  Holy  Scriptures  have  been  preserved  in  a  surprising 
degree  of  purity.'* 

The  passage  now  under  notice  (2  Sam.  xxi.  8)  has 
every  appearance  of  being  interpolated  for  the  purpose, 
of  justifying  the  more  zealous  adherents  of  David  in 
having  compassed  the  death  of  all  claimants  to  his 
throne  who  were  likely  to  be  troublesome,  a  practice 
which  then  universally  prevailed.  Be  this  as  it  may, 
the  transaction  described  is  certainly  out  of  harmony 
with  other  parts  of  Divine  revelation,  and  the  act,  if  it 
ever  took  place,  was  a  direct  violation  of  the  oath  by 
which  David  had  pledged  himself  to  Saul  to  preserve 
his  children.  The  incident,  as  it  stands,  is  quite  un- 
*  Kitto's  Bib.  Cycl.  art.  '  Biblical  Criticism.' 


156  LIBER   LIBEORTJM. 

connected  with  any  other  part  of  Scripture,  and  its  with- 
drawal does  not  affect  any  fact  or  doctrine  elsewhere 
stated.  No  one  is  bound  to  believe  that,  under  the  Old 
Testament  dispensation,  God  either  commanded  or  ap- 
proved any  transaction  the  moral  character  of  which 
cannot  be  defended.  Treachery,  falsehood,  or  the  indul- 
gence of  a  revengeful  spirit  in  any  form,  are  not  to  be 
regarded  as  approved  by  God  because  they  may  be  nar- 
rated without  disapprobation  by  the  historian.  That 
they  could  be,  would  never  have  entered  the  mind  of 
any  man,  but  for  the  supposed  necessity  of  sustaining 
the  plenary  inspiration  of  every  part  of  the  Bible. 

The  extermination  of  the  Midianites,  which  has  already 
been  noticed  in  connection  with  other  remarks  on  the 
massacre  of  the  Canaanites,^  appears  at  first  sight  to 
have  been  marked  by  a  peculiarly  disgusting  feature, 
the  sparing  of  the  female  children  and  virgins,  since  it 
is  commonly  assumed  by  objectors  that  these  were 
reserved  for  prostitution.  Very  little  reflection,  how- 
ever, will  suffice  to  show  that  this  was  not  the  case. 
'  The  law  prohibited  an  Israelite  even  from  marrying  a 
captive  without  delays  and  previous  formalities ;  and  if 
he  afterwards  divorced  her,  he  was  bound  to  set  her  at 
liberty  because  he  had  humbled  her  (Deut.  xxi.  10-14). 
They  were  allowed  to  retain  these  Midianitish  captives 
only  as  slaves,  educating  them,  when  they  did  their 
duty,  in  their  families,  and  employing  them  as  domestics, 
because  being  yet  un corrupted  they  could  do  so  without 
moral  danger. 

The  conduct  of  David  towards  the  Ammonites  (2 
Sam.  xii.  31)  has  been  also  represented  as  an  act  of 
^  See  Correspondence,  'Reply  to  the  Doubter,'  p.  37. 


IFFICITLTIES    IN   THE   BIBLE.  157 

diabolic  cruelty,  since  he  is  said  to  have  'put  them 
under  saws,  and  under  harrows  of  iron,  and  under  axes 
of  iron,  and  made  them  pass  through  tlie  brick-kihi.' 
This  charge  vanishes  when  it  is  seen  that  the  Hebrew 
word  translated  *  under,'  means  also  *to.'  The  state- 
ment, properly  rendered,  is  that  he  employed  them  as 
slaves  in  sawing  wood,  working  harrows  (or  perhaps 
iron  mines),  and  in  making  bricks. 

The  slaughter  of  the  Amalekites,  on  the  supposition 
that  it  was  commanded  by  God,'  has  been  said  to  justi- 
fy, or  at  least  to  furnish  an  apology  for,  religious  perse- 
cution, since  it  seems  to  teach  that  the  destruction  by 
man  of  those  who  are  regarded  as  the  enemies  of  God, 
is  pleasing  in  the  Divine  sight.  But  it  really  inculcates 
no  such  lesson ;  for  neither  Moses  nor  Joshua,  nor 
indeed  any  person  mentioned  with  approbation  in  Scrip- 
ture, ever  made  war  on  any  nation  on  this  ground, 
beyond  the  borders  of  the  promised  land.  They  had 
no  commission  to  overthrow  idolatry  by  the  sword ;  no 
command  to  destroy  idolaters  as  such  out  of  their  own 
land,  and  they  never  attempted  to  do  it.  The  particular 
tribes  inhabiting  Palestine  who  refused  to  depart,  and 
resisted  in  battle  the  armies  of  Israel,  were  indeed  so 
dealt  with,  but  not  the  heathen  generally.  On  the  con- 
trary, the  prophets  plead  their  cause  along  with  that  of 
the  widow  and  the  fatherless,  and  one  of  them  at  least 
looks  forward  with  joy  to  the  time  when  they  shall  be 
in  all  respects  equal  with  Israel  (Ezek.  xlvii.  22). 
What,  indeed,  can  be  more  touching  than  the  declara- 
tion that  the  Lord  loveth  the  stranger  (the  heathen)  in 
giving  him  food  and  raiment?  *Love  ye  therefore,' 
*  See  Correspondence,  'Reply  to  the  Doubter,'  pp.  38,  39.. 


158  LIBEK   LIBROEUM. 

He  says,  'the  stranger:  for  ye  were  strangers  in  the 
land  of  Egypt'  (Dent.  x.  19). 

4.  The  fact  that  certain  miracles  are  recorded  in  the 
Old  Testament  of  a  character  not  in  harmony  with  the 
general  principles  that  characterize  the  exercise  of  super- 
human power  in  other  cases,  again  suggests  t\\Q  possibil- 
ity of  interpolation.  We  say  certain  miracles,  because, 
as  a  rule,  the  miraculous  in  the  Old  Testament  is  marked 
by  precisely  the  same  features  as  in  the  New.  These 
features  are  benevolence,  dignity,  and  congruity  with 
all  that  is  revealed  of  the  character  of  God.  There  is 
nothing  theatrical  about  them,  no  mere  wonder-working, 
nothing  aimless  and  objectless,  nothing  monstrous  or 
prodigious.  In  each  and  all  of  them  we  see  '  the  super- 
natural standing  in  relation  to  the  Infinite,'  and  we  are 
awed  rather  than  startled  as  we  gaze.  But  it  can 
scarcely  be  said  that  this  is  true  of  all  the  miracles  re- 
corded in  Jewish  history.  There  are  exceptional  cases, 
and  in  relation  to  these  some  doubt  may  well  be  enter- 
tained. 

As  we  have  just  observed,  the  direct  interferences  of 
God,  whatever  their  object,  whether  visible  or  invisible, 
whether  accomplished  through  the  agency  of  the  ele- 
ments, or  by  a  power  which  left  no  sign,  are  all  marked 
be  a  majesty  and  dignity  which  stamps  them  as  Divine. 
For  whatever  we  may  say  or  think  as  to  what  would  be 
really  involved  in  the  shadow  going  back  on  the  sun- 
dial of  Ahaz ;  however  ignorant  we  are  as  to  whether 
the  overthrow  of  the  walls  of  Jericho  Avas  or  was  not 
occasioned  by  the  agency  of  an  earthquake ;  whether  or 
no  the  destruction  of  the  Assyrian  army  was  effected  by 
means  of  a  deadly  simoom,  or  literally  by  an  angel  of 


DIFFICULTIES    IN   THE   BIBLE.  169 

God ;  whether  the  speaking  serpent  in  Eden  was  an 
actual  animal  or  but  the  embodiment  of  Satan  ;  whether 
the  voice  of  the  ass  rebuking  Balaam  was  actual  speech 
or  only  an  utterance  subjective  to  the  prophet,  matters 
little,  so  long  as  we  recognise  in  these  things  the  super- 
natural interference  of  the  Creator,  and  regard  them  as 
equally  supernatural  with  the  appearance  of  the  pillar 
of  cloud  and  of  fire,  the  descent  of  God  on  Mount  Sinai, 
and  the  Resurrection  of  the  Redeemer. 

Most  of  us  have,  no  doubt,  always  thought  of  the 
passage  of  the  Red  Sea  as  having  been  eifected  calmly, 
the  waters  quietly  parting  as  Moses  waved  the  rod. 
Yet  our  faith  is  not  endangered  when  we  come  to  per- 
ceive that  Dean  Stanley  is,  in  all  probability,  right,  in 
supposing  that  it  took  place  amid  a  hurricane  of  wind  ; 
the  sea  roaring  as  it  was  driven  back,  and  the  darkness 
being  lit  up  by  streams  of  lightning.  By  taking  this 
view,  we  come  to  understand  better  than  we  otherwise 
should  the  sublime  words  of  David  when  he  says,  'The 
w^aters  saw  Thee,  O  God,  the  waters  saw  Thee ;  they 
were  afraid  :  the  depths  also  were  troubled.  The  voice 
of  Thy  thunder  was  in  the  heaven  :  the  lightnings  light- 
ened the  Avorld:  the  earth  trembled  and  shook.  Thy 
way  is  in  the  sea,  and  Thy  path  in  the  great  waters, 
and  Thy  footsteps  are  not  known.  Thou  leddest  thy 
people  like  a  flock  by  the  hand  of  Moses  and  Aaron ' 
(Ps.  Ixxvii.  18-20). 

The  real  difficulty  connected  with  some  of  the  mira- 
cles recorded  in  the  Old  Testament  is  not  their  sup- 
posed supernatural  character,  but  the  circumstances 
under  which  they  are  said  to  have  been  wrought.  The 
lofty  command  of  Joshua,  uttered  amid  the  excitement 


160  LIBER   LIBEOKTJM. 

of  battle,  and  in  the  sight  of  Israel,  '  Sun  stand  thou 
still:  upon  Gibeon  ;  and  thou,  Moon,  in  the  valley  of 
Ajalon,'  followed  as  it  is  by  the  declaration  that  '  the 
sun  stood  still,  and  hasted  not  to  go  down  about  a  ichole 
day^  is  of  this  character,  especially  when  the  authority 
for  the  statement  is  said  to  be  the  Book  of  Jasher,  of 
which  we  know  nothing  (Josh.  x.  13).  The  difficulty 
is  not  in  the  unscientific  character  of  the  language,  for 
that  might  be  colloquial ;  nor  yet  in  any  miraculous 
prolongation  of  light  if  God  so  willed  it,  but  in  the 
tone  of  the  whole  transaction. 

Again,  certain  miracles  said  to  have  been  wrought  by 
Elisha,  such  as  the  healing  of  the  waters  of  Jericho,  at 
the  request  of  the  'men  of  the  city^  so  that  dearth  or 
barrenness  should  not  be  there  any  more  (2  Kings  ii. 
19-22) ;  the  cursing  of  those  who  mocked  him,  and  the 
consequent  destruction  of  forty-two  young  men  (not 
'  little  children ')  by  two  she-bears  (2  Kings  ii.  23-4) ; 
the  making  iron  to  swim  in  order  that  one  of  the  sons 
of  the  prophets  might  secure  a  borrowed  axe  (2  Kings 
vi.  5) ;  and  the  return  to  life  of  a  man  accidentally  cast 
into  the  prophet's  sepulchre  when  the  corpse  touched 
Elisha's  bones  (2  Kings  xiii.  21),  have  all  of  them  a  very 
apocryphal  appearance  ;  inasmuch  as,  in  each  instance, 
they  are  wrought  for  purposes  which — reverently  speak- 
ing and  in  the  light  of  Scripture  alone — seem  to  us  to 
be  unworthy  of  Divine  interference.  In  one  case  the 
miracle  seems  to  be  wrought  merely  to  meet  the  wishes 
of  men  apparently  seeking  only  their  own  advantage ; 
in  another  to  carry  out  what  certainly  looks  like  vin- 
dictive revenge  for  personal  insult ;  in  a  third,  to  save 
the  cost  of  a  small  purchase;   and  in  the  last  appa- 


DIFFICULTIES    IN   THE   BIBLE.  IGl 

rently  for  no  object  whatever  beyond  mere  wonder- 
working. 

Now,  the  question  is,  on  lohat  principle  can  these 
stories  about  Elisha  be  rejected,  if  the  second  book  of 
Kings,  in  which  they  are  found,  is  to  be  retained,  and  if 
other  statements  contained  therein  regarding  the  same 
prophet  are  to  be  believed  ?  The  answer  seems  to  be. 
Either  by  accepting  the  second  book  of  Kings  in  its 
true  character — that  of  an  historical  record,  but  sup- 
posing it  to  have  been  composed  by  men  who  were 
liable  to  accept  floating  traditions  without  sufficient 
discrimination — or  that  the  work  has  been  somewhat 
with  at  a  later  period.  The  latter  seems  to  be  far  the 
more  probable  explanation.  If  any  evidence  can  be 
produced  to  show  that  the  second  book  of  Kings  was, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  written  by  men  who  were  miracu- 
lously preserved  from  error,  and  further  that  no  inter- 
polation can  by  possibility  have  taken  place,  the7i  of 
course  we  are  bound  to  accept  all  that  is  contained 
therein,  and  to  believe  that — account  for  it  as  we  may 
— the  great  principles  which  dignify  and  sustain  the 
miracles  of  our  Lord  and  His  apostles  were  not  adhered 
to  under  the  Old  Testament  dispensation. 

But  surely  we  ought  not  to  come  to  such  a  con- 
clusion either  hastily  or  on  insufficient  grounds.  The 
test^  be  it  remembered,  by  which  these  stories  are  to  be 
tried  is  the  Word  of  God  itself,  not  mere  human  opinion; 
the  ground  of  rejection  is  precisely  the  same  as  that  on 
which  the  story  of  Tobit  and  the  fish,  and  of  Bel  and 
the  Dragon  were  originally  pronounced  untrustw^orthy. 
Nothing,  therefore,  can  be  more  unwarranted  than  the 
popular  cry — too  often  encouraged  by  those  who  ought 


162  LIBER   LIBRORirM. 

to  know  better — that  any  exercise  of  the  verifying 
faculty  in  the  present  day  77iust  end  in  each  man's 
accepting  or  rejecting  just  as  much  of  Scripture  as  may 
suit  him. 

Such  an  assertion  is  unwarrantable:  (1)  Because,  as 
we  have  already  said,  the  test  applied  is  not  human 
but  Divine.  (2)  Because,  being  such,  its  application 
belongs  only  to  those  whose  spirits  have  by  Divine 
grace  been  more  or  less  brought  into  harmony  with  the 
Divine  Will.  (3)  Because  it  is  the  principle — almost 
the  only  ruling  principle — on  which  any  settlement  of 
the  canon  has  ever  proceeded.  At  the  very  earliest 
period  tradition  no  doubt  had  great  weight,  but  as  this 
weakened  by  lapse  of  time  the  spiritual  discernment 
of  the  Churches  became  paramount.  (4)  Because  it  is, 
in  all  respects,  more  to  be  depended  upon  than  any  mere 
comparison  of  manuscripts  would  be,  were  they  in 
existence.  We  say  tnere  comparison,  because  the  re- 
jection^  for  instance,  of  the  text  known  as  'the  three 
heavenly  witnesses,'  while  partially  justified  by  its  ab- 
sence from  early  manuscripts,  is  far  more  conclusively 
supported  by  its  own  character.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  retention  of  the  narrative  of  the  woman  taken  in 
adultery,  although  wanting  in  so  many  copies,  is  not 
only  justified  by  internal  evidence,  but  also  by  the  far 
greater  probability  that  such  a  narrative  should  have 
been  excluded,  as  dangerous,  at  a  time  when  inflated 
and  exaggerated  notions  about  virginity  were  prevalent, 
than  that  it  should  have  been  interpolated  under  any 
circumstances  whatever. 

In  relation  to  the  New  Testament  there  is  probably 
but  one  miracle  that  is  fairly  questionable — that  of  the 


DIFFICULTIES   IN   THE   BIBLE.  163 

supposed  periodical  descent  of  an  angel  into  the  pool  of 
Bethesda.  And  this  is  rejected  by  believing  critics  on 
precisely  the  same  grounds  as  those  that  have  been 
stated — its  want  of  congruity  with  other  miracles,  and 
its  obvious  improbability.  It  is  incongruous,  because  a 
standing  miracle  of  this  sort,  wrought,  apart  from  any 
religious  end,  in  a  great  city  like  Jerusalem,  is  alto- 
gether unlike  anything  else  recorded.  It  is  improbable, 
because  Josephus,  who  would  only  have  been  too  proud 
to  boast  of  this  mark  of  the  Divine  favour  to  the  Jews, 
makes  no  mention  of  it.  The  view  taken  of  the  matter 
by  many  commentators  is,  that  the  angel  referred  to  was 
a  messenger  from  the  temple  who  at  stated  seasons 
stirred  up  the  blood  received  there  from  the  sacrifices, 
and  that  this  was  popularly  supposed  to  possess  healing 
virtues. 

The  opinions  of  wise  and  good  men,  again,  regarding 
demoniacs  are  various,  and  so  long  as  they  do  not  limit 
the  power  of  God  or  explain  away  that  which  is  w^ritten 
they  are  innocent.  The  darkness  at  the  Crucifixion, 
objected  to  by  Gibbon  as  asserting  an  eclipse  which  did 
not  then  take  place,  Guizot,  following  Origen,  shows  to 
be  in  all  probability  a  preternatural  darkness  occasioned 
in  the  atmosphere.  But  all  these  varieties  of  opinion  en- 
tertained by  men  who  in  common  hold  to  the  essential 
verity  of  Scripture  as  a  Divine  revelation,  only  go  to 
show  how  frank  and  fearless  has  been  the  criticism  to 
which  the  Book  has  been  subjected,  and  how  willing 
many  Christians  are  in  the  strength  of  their  faith  to 
deal  with  it  without  any  unfair  reserve. 

5.  The  objection  that  doctrines  are  taught  in  the 
Bible  which  are  inconsistent  either  with  the  justice  or 


16i  LEBER   LIBRORUM. 

the  love  of  God  cannot  be  sustained.  That  such  are 
frequently  inferred  from  the  sacred  text  is  true  enough ; 
but  these  conclusions  belong  to  the  interpretation  of  the 
Book  by  man,  not  to  what  it  reveals  as  from  God.  It 
has  certainly  yet  to  be  proved  that  any  doctrine  of  elec- 
tion bearing  on  the  world  to  come,  is  to  be  found  in  the 
Bible,  that  is  different  in  principle  from  that  which,  as  a 
fact  of  life,  obtains  in  the  providential  government  of 
God  on  earth,  viz.  the  selection  of  some  even  before 
birth  to  rank  and  wealth,  while  others  are  introduced 
only  to  poverty  and  degradation.  The  end — however 
much  it  may  be  evaded  or  lost  sight  of  on  earth — ^being, 
in  both  worlds,  that  by  this  means  all  may  be  benefited, 
some  by  giving  and  some  by  receiving.  The  few  are 
favoured,  only  that  by  their  loving  self-sacrifice  the 
many  may  be  more  favoured.  That  it  is  often  not  so 
now,  is  no  evidence  that  it  will  not  be  so  in  'the  new 
earth  wherein  dwelleth  rlgliteousness!' 

The  dosfma  of  the  Eternal  sensitive  suffering^  of  those 
who  are  unconverted  Acre,  which  has  descended  to  us 
from  the  apostasy  has,  we  firmly  believe,  no  place  in  the 
Word  of  God ;  it  is,  at  the  best,  but  a  human  and  very 
inaccurate  theological  inference. 

Even  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity — for  the  word 
itself  is  not  Scriptural — much  has  been  said  and  written 
which  can  find  no  sanction  in  the  Bible.  Scripture 
indeed  bids  us  see  in  the  Father,  the  Eternal  Will 
creating  and  governing  all  things.  Omnipotent,  Omni- 
scient, and  Omnipresent;  in  the  Word,  God  communi- 
cating with  man,  declaring  the  Divine  Will  to  him  and 
becoming  incarnate  for  his  redemption ;  and  in  the 
Holy  Spirit   eternal  life   and  love  working:   out  the 


DIFFICULTIES   IN   THE    BIBLE.  165 

Divine  designs  whether  in  creation  or  redemption  ;  but 
it  tells  us  also  that  these  are  One.  There  it  leaves  us ; 
for  the  nature  or  mode  of  an  eternal  triplicity  in  the 
Divine  nature  is  far  beyond  the  comprehension  of  finite 
minds.  Nor  is  it  too  much  to  say  that  the  progress 
of  truth  has  been  greatly  hindered  by  metaphysical  dis- 
tinctions, often  utterly  unmeaning,  regarding  the  Divine 
existence ;  as  well  as  by  expressions  which,  although 
embodying  more  or  less  that  which  is  true,  are  in  them- 
selves unauthorised. 

To  apply  to  Christ  such  terms  as  '  Very  God  of  very 
God,  begotten  not  made ;'  to  speak  of '  God  the  Son  and 
God  the  Holy  Ghost;'  of  'three  persons  but  one  God,' 
and  such  like,  however  needful  in  scholastic  controversy, 
or  whatever  amount  of  truth  they  may  embody,  cannot 
be  justified  by  apostolic  habits  of  thought  and  expres- 
sion. These  phrases  too  often  occasion  the  very  evil 
they  are  intended  to  meet,  and  very  frequently  distress 
and  perplex  tender  souls  by  creating  difficulties  which 
would  otherwise  never  be  felt.  But '  fools  rush  in  where 
angels  fear  to  tread.' 

Dr.  Irons  seems  to  imagine  that  the  absence  from 
Scripture  of  such  words  as  'Trinity,'  'Holy  Orders,' 
'  Holy  Sacrament,'  '  Priest,'  and  such  like,  is  fatal  to 
those  who  regard  the  Bible  as  their  only  guide.  '  What,' 
he  says,  '  is  to  become  of  all  these  to  the  man  whose 
criticised  Bible  is  his  revelation?"  Whether  or  no 
eternal  punishment  is  taught  in  Scrijyture  he  admits  has 
been  made  'fairly  debateable."^  But  one  thought  meets 
all  difficulty.  '  Him  whom  we  ignorantly  worship,  the 
Church  declares  unto  us  by  her  creeds,  her  sacraments, 

'  The  Bible  and  its  Interpreters,  p.  GT.  ^  Ibid.  pp.  94,  96. 


166  LIBER    LIBEOKUM. 

and  her  hierarchy,  and  these  things,'  he  holds,  '  come. 
into  being  quite  apart  from  St.  Matthew's  Gospel,  or 
St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  or  the  Revelation  of 
St.  John.'  So  broad  is  the  distinction  between  the  Bible 
and  Church  authority ;  so  needful  is  it  to  keep  in  mind 
that  in  defending  the  one  we  have  nothing  to  do  with 
any  perplexities  arising  out  of  the  other. 

6.  The  last  difficulty  to  be  looked  at  is  the  supposed 
unintelliglbUity  of  Scripture,  shown  by  the  division  of 
opinion  to  which  it  has  given  rise  among  those  who 
study  it  diligently  and  earnestly.  This  is,  by  far,  the 
most  serious  difficulty  of  all,  and  would  indeed  be  fatal 
to  the  pretensions  of  the  book  as  containing  a  message 
from  God  to  man,  if  it  could  also  be  shown  that  the 
cause  of  the  divisions  in  question  is  to  be  found  in  the 
darkness  of  the  document  rather  than  in  the  prejudices 
and  worldly  interests  of  its  expositors.  But  this  cannot 
be  done.  No  such  diversity  existed  originally,  and  it 
exists  now  only  as  a  result  of  that  great  and  disastrous 
falling  away  which  Paul  foresaw  and  predicted  (2  Thess. 
ii.  7). 

To  imagine,  as  so  many  do,  that  Romanism,  or 
Lutheranism,  or  Anglicanism,  ov  any  other  particular 
form  of  organised  Christianity,  embodies  in  itself  this 
evil  thing  is  absurd.  The  'Mystery  of  Iniquity,'  it  is 
clear  enough,  worked  in  apostolic  days,  as  it  has  worked 
ever  since,  viz.  through  the  corruption  of  religion  by 
its  association  with  secular  advantages.  Whether  these 
come  in  the  shape  of  money,  or  of  power,  of  popularity, 
or  of  status  matters  little.  '  I  know,'  says  Paul  to  the 
elders  of  the  Ephesians,  '  that  after  my  departing  shall 
grievous  wolves  enter  in  among  you,  not  sparing  the 


DIFFICULTIES    IN   THE    BIBLE.  167 

flock'  (Acts  XX.  29).  Already,  he  says,  there  are  many 
'  who  make  a  traffic  of  the  word^  for  so  Archbishop 
Trench  translates  the  second  of  Corinthians  (ii.  17). 
'Beware,'  he  writes  to  the  Colossians,  'lest  any  man 
make  booty  of  you,  through  philosophy' — scientific  and 
systematic  theology  so  called  (Col.  ii.  8).  'Woe  unto 
them,'  exclaims  Jude,  for  '  they  have  run  greedily  after 
the  error  of  Balaam  for  reioarcV  (v.  11).  'Withdraw 
thyself,'  says  Paul  to  Timothy,  from  men  of  corrupt 
minds  who  suppose  that  'gain  is  godliness;'  or  rather, 
according  to  Dr.  Trench,  that  '  godliness  is  lucre — a 
means  of  getting  gain'  (1  Tim.  vi.  5). 

Very  startling  indeed  is  it  to  find  that  at  so  early  a 
period,  and  at  a  time  when  one  would  have  thought 
that  persecution  and  death  were  the  only  rewards  that 
awaited  the  minister  of  Christ,  the  germ  at  least  of 
coming  greed  and  ambition  should  have  been  traceable. 
Yet  so  it  was ;  teaching  us  at  least  this  lesson,  that  no 
outward  circumstances,  however  app:irently  fivourable 
to  purity,  can  altogether  hinder  designing  men  from 
usurping  authority  over  conscience,  or  getting  gain  out 
of  persons  who  are  capable  of  being  bribed  by  the 
promise  of  ease. 

But  how,  it  ivill  perhaps  be  said,  does  this  fact,  if  it 
be  one,  account  for  the  all  but  endless  diversity  of 
opinion  which  exists  as  to  what  the  Bible  really  teaches? 
— for  this  is  the  point  witli  which  we  have  now  to  deal. 

The  reply  is  obvious.  Ecclesiastical  bodies,  whatever 
may  be  their  character — whether  ruling  a  state  or  ruled 
by  it,  whether  established  or  voluntary,  whether  bond 
or  free — cannot  exist  without,  in  one  form  or  other, 
requiring  adherence  to  church  authority  in  matters  of 


168  LIBER   LIBKORnvr. 

faith.  Some — as  Eijiscopalians  or  Presbyterians — en- 
force by  subscription  that  particular  form  of  thought 
which  is  embodied  in  their  articles  or  catechism.  Some, 
like  the  Wesleyans,  require  a  more  general  but  not  less 
stringent  adherence  to  the  writings  of  their  great  found- 
er. Others,  as  Independents  or  Baptists,  cast  anchor  on 
Puritan  ground.  All,  without  exception,  fix  before- 
hand the  great  outline  of  belief,  expressed  or  understood, 
which  must  be  accepted  before  any  man  can  share  the 
privileges,  or  derive  benefit  from  the  emoluments  which 
belong  to  the  church  or  congregation  in  which  he  may 
desire  to  minister.  As  a  rule,  the  preacher  is  specially 
educated  in  and  required  to  abide  by  the  dogmas  of  the 
particular  sect  for  whose  service  he  is  intended.  Dif- 
ferences are  in  this  way  perpetuated. 

And  here  let  us,  once  for  all,  decidedly  protest  against 
the  line  of  argument  we  are  pursuing  being  construed 
into  an  attack  either  on  the  creeds  or  the  government  of 
the  Church  of  England,  or  regarded  as  an  assault  on  any 
Church  or  body  of  ministers  either  in  our  own  country 
or  elsewhere.  This  is  not  the  place  to  carry  on  such  a 
warfare,  were  it  either  needful  or  desirable  to  do  so. 
But  it  is  not.  We  are  answering  the  objections  of  the 
sceptic  not  to  the  Church  but  to  the  ^ible ;  and  if,  in 
doing  so,  we  are  compelled  to  separate  the  one  from  the 
other,  and  in  the  interests  of  truth  obliged  to  put  aside 
everything  in  the  world,  beyond  the  Book  we  have 
undertaken  to  defend,  this,  instead  of  being  matter  of 
complaint,  should  be  cheerfully  acquiesced  in  by  those 
who  profess  to  regard  every  other  interest  as  unimport- 
ant when  brought  into  comparison  with  that  of  the  Word 
of  God. 


DIFFICULTIES    IN   THE    BIBLE.  169 

The  Church  and  the  Bible  have  not  always  needed 
separate  defenders.  It  is  granted  by  all  parties — 'by 
the  thoroughly  evangelical  Count  de  Gasparin,  by  the 
liberal  Neander,  and  by  the  Roman  Catholic  Mohler ' — 
that  among  the  earliest  disciples  '  there  was  not  the 
remotest  desire  to  unravel  the  puzzles  which  afterwards 
beset  the  theological  world.  There  is  in  their  child-like 
faith  an  utter  unconsciousness  of  them.  With  regard  to 
outward  forms  the  apostles  verged  towards  indifference. 
They  did  not  look  on  baptism  as  of  great  consequence ; 
and  they  regarded  the  observance  of  the  eucharist  as 
binding  on  them,  because  it  was  a  memorial  instituted 
by  Him  who  was  their  life,  and  the  object  of  in  tensest 
love.  In  the  administration  of  their  communities  there 
ruled  one  great  principle,  viz.,  that  each  Chiistian  man 
was  a  king  and  a  priest — that  by  tlie  indwelling  of 
Christ's  spirit  within  him  he  had  become  a  free  man  in 
the  highest  sense  of  the  word.  The  organization  of 
churches  under  different  office-bearers  might  proceed  in 
various  ways,  provided  this  principle  were  untouched — 
and  in  fact  the  offices  in  the  churcli,  if  they  might  be 
called  offices,  were  not  fixed,  established  modes  of  gov- 
ernment, but  wise  methods  of  bringing  every  gift  of  the 
church  into  active  employment.'  ^  If,  therefore,  it  should 
seem  to  any  that  we  have  reflected  on  modern  Churches, 
let  it  be  borne  in  mind  that  we  have  done  so  unwillingly, 
and  only  to  remove  occasions  of  stumbling  out  of  the 
way.  ^ 

Our  only  anxiety  is  that  in  considering  difficulties  in 
Scripture,  men  should  not  attribute  to  the  Book  that 

^  Doaaldsoii's  History  of  Christian  Literature  and  Doctrine,  vol.  I 
pp.  50-52. 


170  LIBER   LTBEOKUM. 

which  really  does  not  belong  to  it.  Forgetfulness  of 
this  distinction  has  led  a  recent  writer  to  maintain — 
surely  without  any  good  reason — that  *the  doctrines 
which  the  great  mass  of  Christians  have  drmcn  frotn  the 
Bible,  for  eighteen  centuries,  must  either  be  what  God 
meant  them  to  draw,  or  else  He  did  not  inspire  the 
Book.  One  thing  or  other,  it  is  said,  must  hold — the 
old  sense  of  the  old  words,  or  else  the  admission  that 
they  were  not  miraculously  given  by  the  Creator  of  the 
human  mind  for  its  instruction.'  All  this  of  course  pro- 
ceeds on  the  supposition — favoured  alike  by  believers  and 
by  scejDtics — that  one  of  the  greatest  historical  facts  in 
the  world  may  be  altogether  ignored,  viz.,  the  existence 
and  influence  of  a  departure  from  the  faith,  which,  work- 
ing unseen  during  the  later  portions  of  the  apostolic  age, 
rapidly  developed  after  the  decease  of  the  last  member 
of  the  sacred  college  into  that  '  mystery  of  iniquity ' 
which  culminated  in  Rome,  and  which  has  ever  since 
dominated  over  by  far  the  largest  portion  of  Christen- 
dom, flinging  its  shadow  to  this  day,  more  or  less,  upon 
all  of  us.  To  the  surprising  transformation  wrought  in 
all  lands  by  this  undergrowth  of  error  in  the  garden  of 
the  Lord,  Dean  Stanley  has  beautifully  alluded  in  his 
introductory  lecture  on  *  Ecclesiastical  History.' 

It  is,  we  are  aware,  commonly  urged  in  extenuation 
of  our  religious  diversities  that  the  difierences  of  Chris- 
tians as  to  doctrine  are  not  so  great  as  they  seem ;  that 
the  confessions  of  the  reformed  of  difierent  countries 
are,  after  all,  very  similar ;  that  even  Romanism  main- 
tains a  body  of  truth  which  is  common  to  all  true  be- 
lievers; and  there  are  those,  we  doubt  not,  who  will 
blame  us  for  not  having  brought  this  fact  forward  as  a 


DIFFICULTIES    IN    THE    BIBLE.  171 

sufficient  answer  to  the  objection  of  the  sceptic.  We 
cannot  do  so,  because  it  does  not  satisfy  our  own  mind. 
The  various  Churches  of  Christendom  are,  as  a  fact, 
united  in  opinion  only  so  far  as  they  have  followed  in 
common  the  theological  systems  of  Augustine  or  of 
Anselm.  The  agreement,  therefore,  in  question,  so  far 
as  it  goes,  is  hereditary  and  traditional  only,  and  not 
the  result  of  that  humble  but  independent  investigation 
which  is  alone  of  value.  That  a  common  Ghristicm  life 
underlies  all  sorts  of  opinions  is  true  enough,  but  this  is 
not  the  point  under  consideration. 


CHAPTER    IX. 

INTEEPRETATIOISr    OF   SCEIPTUEE. 

Whether  it  be  possible  to  separate  the  defence  of  the 
Bible  as  a  document  from  all  considerations  relative  to 
the  mode  in  which  the  Book  should  be  interpreted,  may- 
be regarded  as  an  open  question.  It  is,  however,  not 
easy  to  see  how  such  a  separation  can  be  absolute,  so 
long  as  the  view  we  take  of  the  contents  of  Scripture 
more  or  less  biases  our  decision  as  to  the  Divine  char- 
acter of  the  record,  or  so  long  as  our  method  of  inter- 
preting that  record  depends,  to  some  extent  at  least,  on 
the  opinion  we  form  regarding  its  inspiration. 

If  the  whole  Book  be  inspired  in  that  plenary  sense 
which  excludes  the  possibility  of  error,  interpretation, 
as  Dr.  Chalmers  somewhere  says,  clearly  resolves  itself 
into  mere  questions  of  grammar.  On  the  contrary,  if 
the  supernatural  character  of  the  revelation  be  denied, 
and  the  Book  comes  to  be  regarded  simply  as  the  expres- 
sion of  the  combined  genius  and  piety  of  the  writers, 
then  its  meaning  will  naturally  be  sought  rather  in  the 
light  of  its  supposed  correspondence  with  the  highest 
intuitions  of  the  reader,  than  in  any  study  of  its  gram- 
matical construction.  Further,  if  it  is  viewed  only  or 
chiefly  as  a  revelation  of  general  principles,  which  are 


INTERPRETATION    OF    SCRIPTURE.  173 

to  be  logically  developed  and  arranged  by  divines 
according  to  the  order  of  their  importance,  Vien  syste- 
matic theology,  or  the  interpretation  of  the  Church 
springs  into  existence,  and  with  it,  in  one  form  or  other, 
the  assumption  of  authority. 

The  sense  of  uncertainty  which,  in  the  present  day, 
has  come  over  so  many  devout  and  believing  minds  as 
to  the  teaching  of  the  Bible,  is  to  be  attributed  partly, 
no  doubt,  to  the  different  conclusions  of  systematic 
theologians,  each  system  claiming  to  be  sustained  by 
Scripture,  and,  therefore,  to  be  positively  true ;  partly 
to  fanciful  expositions  founded  on  the  notion  that  Scrip- 
ture is  given  us  to  he  develo2)ed^  and  that  hidden  mean- 
ings are  in  this  w^ay  to  be  brought  out  of  it ;  and  partly 
to  a  particular  kind  of  textual  preaching,  originating, 
no  doubt,  in  a  somewhat  superstitious  view  of  verbal 
inspiration,  which  demands  that  we  should  dwell  on 
every  word  of  the  text,  as  if  the  very  syllables  possessed 
something  like  a  magic  j^ower  of  their  own.  Any  book 
thus  treated  must  necessarily  soon  be  disencumbered 
of  all  definite  meaning,  and  its  teaching  be  placed  at 
the  mercy  of  its  expositors.  Such  has  in  fact  been  the 
experience  of  the  past.^ 

But  while  Divine  revelation  can  have  but  one  true 
meaning,  nothing  can  be  more  certain  than  that,  being 
a  message  from  the  Heavenly  Father  to  His  erring  and 
sinful  creatures,  it  must  have  a  power  of  adaptation  to 
each  and  all  of  them  in  particular,  which,  from  the  very 
nature  of  the  case,  forbids  any  exhaustive  or  authorita- 
tive interpretation  of  its  contents.  It  has  been  truly 
said  of  Shakspeare  that  he  was  a  '  myriad-minded '  man. 
^  Seo  Appendix,  Note  B.     *  Biblical  Interpretation.' 


174:  LIBER   LIBROEUM. 

How  much  more  may  it  be  said  of  the  Bible,  that  it  is 
a  myriad-miuded  book.  Perhaps  it  is  not  too  much  to 
affirm  that,  being  intended  to  find  affinity  with  every 
possible  variety  of  thought  and  feeling  ;  to  adapt  itself 
to  every  man's  separate  idiosyncrasy  ;  to  reveal  to  each 
just  that  particular  phase  or  form  of  truth  which  is 
needful  for  him  or  her;  which  can  alone  be  made  practi- 
cal and  powerful  for  good  to  him  or  her;  it  is  as  impos- 
sible that  it  should  have  any  one  given  and  stereotyped 
expression,  as  that  it  should  teach  to  every  man  one 
given  and  stereotyped  lesson. 

Yet,  let  it  never  be  forgotten  that  this  peculiarity  by 
no  means  interferes  with  the  dpfiniteness  of  the  message, 
or  in  any  way  tends  either  to  impair  its  explicitness,  or 
to  necessitate  an  authorized  interpretation.  For  only 
as  Scripture  is  allowed  to  adapt  itself  to  the  peculiar 
mental  and  moral  condition  of  each  individual,  do  its 
words  become  '  spirit  and  Hfe '  to  him,  ruling  his  conduct 
and  reigning  in  his  affections.  Instead,  therefore,  of 
finding  an  occasion  of  stumbling  in  the  fact  that  diver- 
sities of  view  on  many  points,  always  have,  and  probably 
always  will  characterise  Christians,  we  might  rather 
discover  in  the  wonderful  adaptation  of  Divine  teaching 
to  each,  evidence  of  the  source  from  which  it  comes. 
For  it  is  at  once  one,  and  yet  diverse ;  unchanging,  and 
yet  endowed  with  a  capacity  of  all  but  infinite  fitness 
to  every  variety  of  character. 

Just  as  material  light,  although  the  same  to  all,  is  yet 
different  to  persons  of  imperfect  vision,  suffering  under 
diverse  forms  of  disease ;  so  is  spiritual  illumination  a 
different  thing  to  men  in  different  stages  of  the  divine 
life,  with  varying  intellectual  powers,  and,  above  all, 


INTERPKl^^TATION    OF    SCRIPTUKE.  175 

with  conflicting  wills,  passions,  and  interests  ;  and  just 
as  it  would  be  impossible  so  to  temper  the  light  of  the 
sun,  that  it  should  leave  precisely  the  same  impression 
on  every  optic  nerve,  whether  sound  or  otherwise,  so  is 
it  neither  possible  nor  desirable  that  Divine  truth  should 
come  home  to  the  man  who  is  jaundiced  by  his  preju- 
dices, or  drugged  by  his  sins,  precisely  as  it  does  to  the 
simple  and  righteous  soul  who  desires  to  knoic,  only 
that  he  may  love  and  obey. 

Nevertheless,  to  repeat  what  we  have  just  said,  we 
should  greatly  err  if  we  argued  from  this  peculiarity  of 
revelation  that  it  had  no  one  definite  and  true  meaning  ; 
that  it  had  more  than  one  ;  or  that  it  ever  was  intended 
to  be  handled  as  a  nucleus,  around  which  ingenious 
illustration,  varied  reasoning,  and  imaginative  eloquence 
might  gather,  for  the  delectation  of  a  mixed  crowd  of 
auditors.  Nor  do  we  less  mistake  when  we  seize  upon 
this  or  any  other  feature  of  Holy  Scripture,  either  for 
the  purpose  of  excusing  our  divisions,  or  as  a  reason  for 
endeavoring  after  a  false  and  deceptive  unity,  by  requir- 
ing the  acceptance  of  any  given  proposition,  or  series 
of  propositions,  deduced  by  the  skill  of  man  from  the 
statements  of  the  Book.  There  is  no  real  unity  on  earth, 
whether  in  the  natural  or  in  the  spiritual  economy, 
which  does  not  consist  in  diversity. 

'  Inspired  teaching,'  says  Dr.  Archer  Butler,  *•  explain 
it  as  we  may,  appears  comparatively  indifferent  to  what 
seems  to  us  so  peculiarly  important — close  logical  con- 
nection, and  the  intellectual  symmetry  of  doctrines.' 
How  muc]i,he  adds,  *is  sometimes  conveyed  by  assump- 
tions, such  as  inspiration  alone  can  make  without  any 
violation  of  the  canons  of  reasoning  l—for  vntJi  U  alone 


176  LIBER   LIBROEUM. 

assertion  is  argument.''  Had  this  truth  been  borne 
in  mind  we  should  have  escaped  many  a  discussion  on 
fate  and  free  will,  and  been  content  to  know  that  while, 
as  creatures,  we  are  necessarily  dependent  on  God  for 
everything,  we  have  yet  free  will  enough  to  be  capable, 
under  Divine  teaching,  of  voluntarily  choosing  the  good 
and  rejecting  the  evil ;  that  life  and  death,  sin  and  grace, 
time  and  eternity,  all  bear  on  the  grand  result  of  this 
voluntary  choice  ;  that  as  its  accomplishment  on  earth, 
in  spite  of  all  hindrances,  in  the  hearts  of  some  is  the 
present  reward  of  the  Redeemer's  sufferings,  its  accom- 
plishment hereafter  on  the  many  will  be  the  final  triumph 
of  Divine  wisdom  and  love. 

Traditional  interpretation  denies  this.  It  allows,  in- 
deed, that, '  as  by  the  disobedience  of  one  man  the  many 
were  made  sinners,  so,  by  the  obedience  of  One  shall 
the  many  be  made  righteous  ;'  that  the  world,  though  a 
fallen,  is  a  redeemed  world  ;  that  Christ  will  eventually 
destroy  the  works  of  the  devil;  that  good  is  destined, 
in  the  long  run,  to  overcome  evil;  and  that  one  day 
'  every  knee  shall  bow  '  to  Him  who  is  '  King  of  kings, 
and  Lord  of  lords.'  But  it  does  so  only  under  many 
limitations.  It  is  slow,  if  not  unwilling,  to  admit  even 
the  restoration  of  those  who  have  here  lived  and  died 
without  even  hearing  of  a  Saviour.  It  looks  for  a  coun- 
terpoise to  the  losses  of  the  past  in  the  salvation  of 
infants,  and  in  the  possible  prolongation  of  a  millennial 
period  until  the  number  of  the  saved  shall  exceed  the 
number  of  the  lost ;  an  arithmetical  way  of  treating 
human  happiness  and  misery  which  has  in  all  ages  found 
plenty  of  admirers,  although  anything  less  Godlike  can 


i 


INTERPRETATION    OF    SCRIPTURE.  177 

scarcely  be  conceived.  Divine  revelation,  however,  is 
not  responsible  for  this  perversity. 

The  Gospel,  as  Christ  presents  it,  is,  in  one  form  or 
other,  good  news  not  to  the  few  only  but  to  all  men 
without  exception;  to  the  heathen  as  well  as  to  the 
Christian ;  to  the  Jew  in  his  impenitence ;  to  the  profli- 
gate in  his  sin ;  to  the  ignorant  in  his  darkness ;  and  to 
the  sceptic  in  his  unbelief.  Not  a  word  intimates  that 
its  entire  value  hangs  either  on  the  knowledge  or  on  the 
belief  of  it  by  those  for  whose  benefit  it  was  announced. 
It  is  a  declaration  of  what  God  will  do  ;  not  of  what  He 
is  willing  to  do  if  man  permit.  If  it  were  not  so, 
human*n:\ture  being  what  it  is,  and  the  world  what  it 
always  has  been,  the  message  would  be^  to  by  far  the 
greater  portion  of  mankind^  of  no  avail  whatever;  the 
consolations  it  offers  would  be,  to  most  persons,  abso- 
lutely unreal,  and  the  mission  of  Christ,  instead  of  being 
a  redeeming  one,  would  involve  little  more  than  the 
ratification  of  a  curse. 

Yet  the  Gospel  is  not  alike  to  all ;  for  it  has  a  special 
object  to  accomplish  as  well  as  a  general  one.  '  God, 
who  is  the  Saviour  of  all  men,  is,  we  are  distinctly  told, 
specially  the  Saviour  of  them  that  beheve'  (1  Tim. 
iv.  10). 

The  mode  in  which  this  double  result  will  be  accom- 
plished is  not  fully  explained  to  us,  but  the  declaration 
is  not  the  less  true  on  that  account.  Some  things  in 
Divine  revelation  are  written  as  with  a  sunbeam ;  other 
things  are  only  hinted  at.  Yet  who  shall  dare  to  say 
that  the  one  is  not  as  certain  as  the  other  ?  As  it  is  in 
Nature,  so  is  it  in  Scripture :  some  things  are  proclaimed 

as  from  the  mountain  top ;  other  things  are  only  whis- 
8* 


178  LIBER  libroeiim:. 

pered  to  the  listening  ear.  The  one  arrests  attention ; 
the  other  reicards  it.  Some  things  are  needful  to  be 
known  for  present  guidance;  other  things  are  opened 
up  as  a  recompense  to  those  who  desire  to  gain  a  full 
understanding  of  all  the  ways  of  God,  so  far  as  He  may 
please  to  let  us  become  acquainted  with  them.  Yet  all 
alike  demand  the  scrutiny  of  the  wise,  and  all  alike 
reward  the  diligence  of  the  industrious. 

That  the  Bible  has  a  twofold  purpose  to  accomplish 
in  the  world  is  evident  from  its  character.  If  in  one 
aspect  it  addresses  itself  to  man  as  man  everywhere,  in 
another  it  speaks  only  to  a  particular  class  of  men,  viz., 
to  those  who,  knowing  the- voice  of  the  Redeemer,  have 
received  Him  into  their  hearts,  and  believed  on  Him  to 
the  saving  of  their  souls.  To  the  one  it  announces, 
' Glad  tidings  of  gieat  joy,  which  shall  be  to  all  (the) 
people.'  Its  note  is,  '  On  earth  peace,  good  will  toward 
men.'  ^  To  the  other  it  says,  '  Think  not  that  I  am  come 
to  send  peace  on  earth.  I  came  not  to  send  peace  but  a 
sword.'  ^ 

To  the  many  it  speaks  not  only  of  that  silent  abode 
where  the  slave  shall  be  free  from  his  master,  w^here  the 
wicked  cease  from  troubling,  and  where  the  weary  are 
at  rest ;  it  points  also  to  a  world  where  '  there  shall  be 
neither  sorrow  nor  any  more  pain.'  ^  To  thefeio  it  s:iys, 
'AH  things  are  yours,'  whether  'life  or  death,'  whether 
'  things  present  or  things  to  come,'  all  are  yours,  for  ye 
are  Christ's,  and  Christ  is  God's.''  To  both  it  reveals  a 
day  when  reconciliation  between  God  and   man  being 

^  Luke  ii.  10-14.  '  Rev.  xxi.  4. 

-  Matt.  X,  34.  ••  1  Cor.  iii.  21  and  22. 


INTEKPEETATION    OF    SCKIPTUJBE.  179 

perfected  there  shall  be  'new  heavens  and  a  new  earth, 
wherein  dwelleth  righteousness.' ' 

To  all  it  proclaims  a  Father,  little  recognised,  but  not 
the  less  loving,  who  asks  of  every  man  the  obedience 
and  affection  which  is  so  sinfully  withheld  ;  but  to  some 
it  speaks  of  an  'earnest  of  the  Spirit'  already  possessed, 
and  of  a  present  heaven,  enjoyed  even  on  earth,  although 
accompanied  by  many  sorrows,  and  oftentimes  by  great 
tribulation. 

These^  always  said  to  be  '  a  little  flock,'  and  '  a  pecu- 
liar people,'  are  spoken  of  as  having  received  '  power  or 
privilege  to  become  the  sons  of  God '  m  a  special  sense ; 
they  are  'born  from  above,'  born  'not  of  blood  nor  of 
the  will  of  the  flesh,  but  of  God.'  -  Penitent  and  par- 
doned, they  are  declared  to  be  even  now  '  heirs  of  God, 
and  joint  heirs  with  Christ;'  they  are  styled  'elect  and 
chosen;'  they  are  said  to  be  'predestinated  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world,  that  they  might  be  holy  and 
without  blame  before  God  in  love ;'  they  are  to  '  reign 
in  life ;'  t*aey  are  to  be  '  kings  and  priests  to  God  and  to 
Christ  for  ever  and  ever.'  Nor  should  it  be  forgotten 
that  it  is  to  these  that  the  fearful  warnings  which  are  by 
preachers  generally  applied  to  the  ungodly  are  in  the 
text  really  addressed.  In  all  these  cases  the  message  is 
emphaticaUii  to  a  class. 

Broader  distinctions  than  those  referred  to  it  is 
scarcely  possible  to  lay  down.  Confusions  more  disas- 
trous than  those  which  arise  when  these  distinctions  aie 
disregarded  can  scarcely  be  imagined.  Yet  these  con- 
fusions pervade  Christian  society,  and  are  propagated 
with  untiring  zeal  both  from  tlie  pulpit  and  the  press. 
'  2  Pet  iii.  13.  '  Johu  i.  12,  13. 


180  LIBEK   LIBEOEUM. 

The  consequence  is,  that  while  some  regard  the  offers 
of  the  Gospel  as  addressed  only  to  the  elect,  and  others 
look  upon  the  glad  tidings  as  finding  adequate  fulfilment 
in  the  general  improvement  of  society,  in  advancing 
civilisation,  and  in  material  progress,  most  persons, 
blending  the  two,  reduce  the  high  demands  made  upon 
the  Christian,  as  a  man  not  of  this  worlds  to  the  level 
of  humanity  in  general,  and  regard  them  as  imperative 
only  so  far  as  they  are  workable  in  ordinary  Christian- 
ised society. 

The  line  drawn,  however,  in  Scripture^  is  a  very  sharp 
one  and  easily  defined.  On  the  one  side  of  it  stand  not 
only  nominal  believers,  but  the  vast  multitudes  who,  in 
all  past  ages  as  now,  have  either  never  heard  of  Christ, 
or  heard  of  Him  only  in  connection  with  superstitions 
that  have  misled,  assumptions  that  have  disgusted,  or 
sectarianisms  that  have  repelled.  On  the  other  side  of 
the  line  are  to  be  found  all^  by  Avhatever  name  they  may 
be  known,  who,  having  listened  to  the  call  to  immediate 
repentance  and  faith,  have  been  led  by  the  grace  of  God 
earnestly  to  I'egard  and  honestly  to  obey  it. 

To  both  these  classes  a  day  of  judgment  is  announced  ; 
a  day  when  each  shall  receive  according  to  what  he  has 
done  in  the  body,  wbetlier  it  be  good  or  bad,  and  there- 
fore to  all  essentially  a  judgment  of  works.  But  not  in 
the  same  sense.  Of  the  one  we  are  told  that  they  shall 
not  come  into  condemnation  with  the  world.  To  the 
faithful  among  them,  though  it  be  but  in  '  few '  things,  is 
to  be  committed  '  many  things.'  Reward  bestowed  wdll 
be  the  recompense  of  then-  faith  and  steadfastness.  Re- 
ward withheld  will  be  the  punishment  of  their  negligence 
and  sin.     Of  the  other  it  is  said  that  they  shall  be  judged 


INTEEPKETATION    OF    SCKIPTUEE.  181 

eveiy  man  according  to  his  opportunities  and  actual 
doings,  some  being  beaten  with  '  few  stripes,'  and  some 
with  '  many  stripes.' 

Of  the  finally  reprobate  we  will  not  here  speak.  It 
mai/he  that  there  are  men  so  depraved  that  they  cannot 
be  saved  from  themselves  and  from  their  sins,  without 
the  application  offerees  which  are  inconsistent  with  the 
retention  of  that  amount  of  moral  freedom,  apart  from 
which  what  we  call  character  cannot  exist — a  possibility/ 
which  duly  pondered  may  perhaps  throw  light  on  the 
'  lake  of  fire  '  and  '  the  second  death.' 

Such,  as  it  appears  to  us,  is  the  teaching  of  Scripture, 
when  regarded  without  reference  to  the  dogmas  of 
Churches  or  of  sects ;  and  if,  as  we  stated  at  the  begin- 
ning of  this  chapter,  the  view  we  take  of  the  contents  of 
the  Bible  more  or  less  biases  our  decision  as  to  the 
Divine  character  of  the  record,  it  is  not  too  much  to  ask 
that  the  aspect  of  it  now  presented  may  be  weighed 
before  it  is  rejected. 

Corresponding  to  the  ttaofold  tnessage  we  have  indi- 
cated is  the  twofold  form  in  which,  as  a  fact,  the  Gospel 
is  constantly  bearing  upon  mankind :  viz.,  as  an  influ- 
ence in  society^  alleviating  human  sorrow,  modifying 
institutions,  quickening  benevolence,  and  generally  ele- 
vating public  sentiment,  and  as  a  power  from  above, 
transforming  the  individual  believer,  delivering  him 
from  the  dominion  of  evil,  and  making  him  to  feel  that, 
like  his  Lord,  he  is  but  a  pilgrim  and  a  stranger  here. 

Recognised  or  unrecognised,  these  two  forms  of  action 
are  constantly  going  on,  sometimes  separately  embodied 
with  more  or  less  distinctness  in  regularly  organised 
institutions,  and  sometimes  blending  in    Churches  of 


1S2  LIBER   LrBROETTM. 

various  forms  and  character.  The  one^  which  has  been 
called  that  of  multitudinism,  would  seera  naturally  to 
belong  to  national  establishments  of  religion  ;  the  othe)\ 
that  of  individualism,  as  naturally  to  nonconformity. 
Nor  can  it  be  doubted  that  if  each  of  these  classes  {as 
religious  men — for  we  have  here  nothing  to  do  with  any 
man's  duty  as  a  citizen)  was  to  pursue  its  own  calling  of 
God,  regardless  of  everything  else — if  each  could  carry 
out  the  distinctive  principle  it  embodies  without  rivalry, 
the  measure  of  truth  thus  separately  conserved  would 
be  brought  to  bear  upon  the  world  with  far  more  force 
than  it  can  be  amid  the  strifes  and  ambitions  which  now 
so  frequently  characterise  both  parties.  If  each  has 
indeed  a  religious  idea  to  embody,  each  will  of  course 
find  its  strength  in  the  extent  to  which  it  realizes  that 
particular  end  to  which  its  principles  point.  Rivalry, 
leading  to  imitation,  as  it  now  so  often  does,  can  never 
be  of  any  real  service  to  either,  and  still  less  to  the 
world  at  large. ^ 

Rightly  ordered,  the  one  might  teach  us  our  obliga- 
tions as  a  Christian  people ;  the  other,  our  privileges  as 
the  children  of  God.  The  former,  fulfilling  the  mission 
of  the  Baptist,  would  call  every  man  to  repentance. 
The  latter,  recognizing  growth,  would  teach  the  sacred- 
ness  of  religious  convictions,  and  hold  up  indimduallty 
as  the  law  of  the  spiritual  life.  The  first,  whether  work- 
ing through  creeds  and  confessions,  by  the  press  or  by 
the  pulpit,  by  authority  or  by  oratorical  appeal,  would 
seek  to  awaken,  to  rouse,  and  to  guide.  The  last,  recog- 
nising the  fact  that  he  who  has  become  Christ's  has,  by 

^  Sec  Appendix,  Note  C.    'National  Establishments.' 


INTEEPKETATION    OF    SCRIPTURE.  183 

that  affiance,  been  forever  taken  out  of  the  hand  of  man, 
would  seek  to  cherish  the  spiritual  independence  of  the 
renewed  soul,  and  teach  that  to  no  higher  elevation  can 
any  man  reach  than  to  that  which  he  rises  when  he 
becomes  the  scholar  of  God. 

There  may,  however,  still  be  those  who  fail  to  see  that 
any  particular  interpretation  of  Scripture,  whatever  may 
be  its  merits  or  demerits,  can  have  very  much  to  do  with 
the  acceptance  or  rejection  of  the  Book  supposed  to  be 
thus  read  or  misread.  The  question,  therefore,  must  be 
dealt  with  as  one  of  fact.  Such  persons  must  be  content 
to  believe  on  testimony,  whatever  their  own  experience 
may  be,  that  in  many  cases  interpretation  has  a  great 
deal  to  do  with  the  acceptance  or  rejection  of  the  docu- 
ment. The  letter  which  has  been  prefixed  to  this  volume 
may  be  regarded  as  a  witness.  For  there^  as  among  men 
generally,  the  Bible  is  clearly  held  responsible  for  dog- 
mas which  it  does  not  teach,  the  Gospel  being  not  un- 
frequently  rejected  because,  among  other  things,  it  is 
supposed  to  consign  all  but  a  mere  fraction  of  the  human 
race  to  eternal  wickedness  and  misery. 

That  such  is  not  the  fict  can  of  course  only  be  proved 
by  an  appeal  from  man  to  God — from  the  commentary 
to  the  text — from  the  traditions  of  the  Church  to  the  true 
sayings  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  but  this,  of  course,  involves 
interpretation.  Other  evidence  might  be  adduced,  if  it 
were  needful,  to  show  that  the  connection  between  pre- 
vailing unbelief  and  ordinary  orthodox  theology  is  not 
an  imaginary  one.  The  late  Mr.  Isaac  Taylor,  than 
whom  no  one  has  a  better  right  to  speak  on  this  subject, 
has  distinctly  avowed  his  conviction  that  the  only  effec- 
tual remedy  for  modern  scepticism  is  to  be  found  '  in 


184  LIBEE   LIBROKUM.  j 

AN  INTELLIGIBLE  AND   DEFENSIBLE   PEINCIPLE    OF  BlBLI- 

CAL  Inteepeetation.' 

*  Until  this  is  obtained,'  he  says,  '  Christianity  will  be 
found  powerless  against  infidelity.'  Those  who  have 
Avatched  the  current  of  public  opinion  carefully  and 
closely,  know  well — much  as  they  may  dislike  the  con- 
clusion or  shrink  from  the  avowal  of  it — that  '  the  grow- 
ing feeling  that  prevails,  amid  all  the  splendours  of 
advancing  science,  that  this  is  but  the  night-time  of  the 
soul,'  can  only  be  relieved  by  '  a  thorough  and  absolute 
deliverance  of  the  Bible  from  the  trammels  that  have 
been  imposed  upon  it  by  polemical  theology.' ' 

^  The  Restoration  of  Belief. 


i 


CHAPTER    X. 


THE    MODERN    PHARISEE. 


By  the  '  Pharisee '  is  here  meant  the  man  who— like  his 
prototype  of  old — first  attaches  a  superstitious  impor- 
tance to  the  letter  of  Scripture,  and  then  adds  to  it  a 
crowd  of  theological  inferences,  sometimes  based  on  the 
authority  of '  fathers,'  and  sometimes  developed  on  prin- 
ciples of  interpretation  which  permit  the  expositor  to 
tread  in  the  footsteps  of  those  Jewish  rabbis  who  made 
mountains  of  meaning  to  hang  on  the  plainest  statements. 
Pharisees — wliatever  may  be  their  personal  excellence 
— are,  in  relation  to  the  Bible,  mainly  ruled  by  old  pre- 
judices ;  they  delight  in  whatever  is  fixecl^  whether  by 
authority  or  by  the  common  opinion  of  Christians.  They 
insist  that  reverence  for  the  past  is  commanded  in  Scrip- 
ture, since  we  are  told  to  '  ask  for  the  old  paths ;'  that 
submission  to  the  opinions  of  the  good  is  enforced^  since 
we  are  bidden  to  follow  '  tlie  footsteps  of  the  flock.'  The 
connection  in  wliich  these  passages  may  stand  is  with 
such  persons  a  matter  of  very  little  moment.  To  ques- 
ti(m  their  applicability  is  but  to  indicate  the  unhallowed 
consequences  which  flow  from  the  exercise  of  private 
judgment.  To  such  men  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the 
Bible  is  the  Jimt  article^  if  not  the  foundation  of  their 


186  LIBER   LIBRORUM. 

faith.  With  most  of  them  the  authority  of  the  Church 
to  expound  the  volume  is  the  complement  of  their  belief. 

That  this  idea,  however  expressed  or  embodied,  car- 
ries with  it  not  only  the  denial  to  revelation  of  its  self- 
evidencing  nature,  as  light  coming  from  God  to  man, 
but  also  a  casting  away  of  the  birthright  of  the  Christian 
as  a  child  of  the  light,  never  seems  to  enter  the  minds 
of  these  good  men.  They  wonder  that  so  many,  whom 
they  cannot  but  regard  as  true  followers  of  the  Re- 
deemer, should  revolt  against  this  '  disinheriting '  pro- 
cess. They  cannot  see  that  blind  submission  to  autho- 
rity, instead  of  being  identical  with  faith  and  humility, 
is  a  very  different  thing  from  either  the  one  or  the  other. 
They  forget  that  the  filial  spirit  is  to  trust  the  Father^ 
not  the  stranger  or  even  the  brother.  They  forget  that 
to  be  childlike  is  not  to  be  childish,  and  that  Rome  has 
taught  us  there  is  no  limit  to  the  surrender  that  will  be 
demanded  if  once  we  yield  to  any  man  the  right  of  dis- 
cerning  for  us  what  is  true  and  what  is  false. 

Let  us,  however,  inquire  what  can  be  said  for  the 
theory — since  it  is  nothing  more — that  the  Bible  from 
Genesis  to  Revelation  is  inspired  and  infallible. 

The  latest,  and  in  some  respects  the  most  elaborate, 
defence  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Bible  as  a  hook  will  pro- 
bably be  found  in  a  volume  of  sermons  by  Mr.  Burgon, 
preached  before  the  University  of  Oxford  soon  after  the 
publication  of 'Essays  and  Reviews.'  In  reading  that 
work,  as  well  as  various  other  publications  taking  similar 
ground,  one  is  certainly  startled  to  find  not  how  much, 
but  how  very  little,  can  be  advanced  in  favour  either  of 
the  verbal  or  plenary  inspiration  of  Scripture.  Every- 
thing important  in  the  enquiry  seems  to  be  assumed. 


THE   MODERN    PHARISEE.  187 

The  ground  taken  is,  'The  verbal  inspiration  of  the 
Bible  is  an  axiom,  a  first  truth  from  which  all  others 
start.'  The  conclusions  of  those  who  advocate  this 
theory  do  not,  of  course,  embrace  either  the  denial  of 
various  readings  or  the  imperfections  of  translations,  but 
it  is  difficult  to  see  how  the  admission  of  the  one  or  the 
performance  of  the  other  can  be  consistent  with  the 
theory  so  much  valued. 

The  form  in  which  these  views  are  commonly  put  is 
something  like  this :  Our  Lord  has  said,  *  the  Scripture 
cannot  be  broken'  (explained  away — so  Alford  on 
John  X.  35),  therefore  everything  in  the  volume  called 
by  us  the  Bible  is  inspired  and  '  infallible.'  Or  thus : 
'  prophets  and  apostles  claim,  and  justly,  to  deliver 
God- breathed  messages;  therefore  historians,  whether 
narrators  of  what  they  had  seen  or  copyists  from  public 
records,  must  necessarily  possess  the  same  Divine  gift.' 
Or  again :  Jesus  prayed  for  His  apostles,  saying,  '  sanc- 
tify them  by  Thy  truth.  Thy  word  is  truth ;'  therefore 
everything  regarded  as  Scripture  in  our  Lord's  time  is 
God's  revealed  truth.  That  the  Septuagint  then  con- 
tained portions  of  the  Apocrypha  they  do  not  think  it 
worth  while  to  notice.     That  is  one  course  of  reasoning. 

A  second  is  this  :  '  If  the  authorshi})  of  each  book  is 
not  accurately  stated,  the  truthfulness  of  its  contents 
departs.'  Mr.  Burgon  says, '  If  the  son  of  Nun  did  not 
write  the  book  which  goes  under  his  name,  theyi  the 
narrative  is  not  authentic'  If  any  distinction  be  drawn 
between  the  inspired  and  the  uninspired  in  Scripture, 
then  everything  belonging  to  the  latter  category  must 
be  cast  out.  That  which  is  stated  may  be  perfectly 
true  ;  the  man  who  records  it  may  have  been  an  ear  or 


188  LIBEE   LIBROKUM. 

an  eye  witness  of  what  he  tells  us ;  nevertheless,  if  he 
has  not  been  inspired  in  such  a  sense  as  to  render  any 
inaccuracy  impossible,  his  words  are  worthless.  '  We 
refuse,'  Mr.  Burgon  goes  on  to  say,  '  to  retain  a  single 
passage  which  is  not  (in  the  highest  sense)  the  Word  of 
God.'  ISTot  only  must  the  message  itself  be  inspired  and 
infallible,  every  accessory  to  it  must,  in  the  same  way, 
be  inspired  also.  Refusing  to  allow  that  a  given 
thought  may  be  both  truthfully  and  accurately  ex- 
pressed in  varying  words,  he  says,  '  as  for  thoughts 
being  inspired  without  the  words,  you  may  as  well  talk 
of  a  tune  without  notes  or  a  sum  without  figures.' 

These  extravagancies,  for  such  we  cannot  but  think 
them,  are  supposed  to  find  support  in  reasonings  like 
these.  '  Admit  the  slightest  difi*erence  as  to  the  infalli- 
bility of  different  portions  of  the  Bible  and  you  make 
every  man  a  judge  as  to  what  he  will  receive  and  what 
he  will  reject.'  Such  a  man  must  '  take  a  pen  and  cross 
out  every  word  he  imagines  to  be  uninspired,  in  which 
case  how  can  we  know  that  he  does  not  cross  out  texts 
on  which  we  rest  our  hopes  ?'  Such  is  the  second  line 
of  argument. 

But  there  is  a  third  which  amounts  to  this  :  '  Christ  and 
His  apostles  quoted  from  th©  Old  Testament,  therefore 
every  part  of  the  Book  from  which  they  quoted  is  cer- 
tainly inspired.'  Further,  w^here  Christ  and  His  apostles 
apply  Scripture,  the  text  thus  used  must  originally  have 
had  hidden  within  it  the  particular  truth  it  is  used  to 
illustrate  ;  e.  g.  '  If  Deuteronomy  xxv.  4  has  no  re- 
ference to  the  Christian  ministry,  then  the  entire  context 
in  tw^o  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles  (1  Corinthians  ix.  9  ;  1  Ti- 
mothy v.  18)  must  go  at  once.'     Further  still:  if  Paul 


THE   MODERN   PHARISEE.  189 

shows,  as  lie  does,  that  certain  Scriptures  may  be  applied 
allegorically,  all  Scripture  must  have  a  depth  of  meaning 
far  beyond  that  which  appears  ;  in  consequence,  all  of  it 
is  inspired,  and  it  is  our  duty  to  bring  out  hidden  mean- 
ings from  everything,  whatever  may  be  the  end  for 
which  it  was  primarily  given.  '  Even  mere  catalogues 
of  names,'  insists  IVIr.  Burgon,  '  are  full  of  edification, 
the  driest  details  full  of  God.  The  list  of  the  dukes  of 
Edom  is  as  much  inspired,  and  in  the  same  sense,  as 
every  other  part.' '     This  is  the  third  line  of  reasoning. 

It  is  always  difficult  to  state  the  views  of  an  oppo- 
nent in  what  he  would  consider  a  ftur  and  full  manner, 
and  it  is  quite  possible  that  this  has  not  been  accom- 
plished in  the  present  instance.  But  if  it  be  so,  the 
defect  is  unintentional. 

Easy  is  it  to  understand  how  all  this  inconclusive  dis- 
course about  inspiration  may  be  to  many  pious  persons 
wonderfully  attractive.  They  will  say  it  is  such  a 
sim2)le  view,  so  straightforward  and  reverential,  so 
humbling  to  man's  reason,  so  needful  for  his  guidance, 
that  to  reject  it  is  as  dishonouring  to  God  as  it  is  indi- 
cative of  human  pride.  Whether  it  be  a  true  view  or 
not  seems  scarcely  worthy  of  consideration.  To  doubt 
on  such  a  matter  is  to  sin. 

The  answer  to  such  declamation  is,  however,  obvious. 
The  view  in  question  is  a  mere  theory^  and  certainly  not 
the  less  so  because  the  persons  who  hold  it  are  continu- 
ually  telling  us  they  have  no  theory  of  inspiration — they 
believe  in  it,  and  that  is  enough.     The  question  is,  ichy 

^  Gaussen  says  of  the  entire  Bible :  '  In  its  miraculous  pages  every 
verse  and  word,  without  exception,  even  to  a  particle  apparently  the 
most  indififerent,  must  have  been  given  of  God.' 


190  LIBEE   LIBEORUM. 

do  they  believe  in  what  is  called  the  verbal  inspiration 
of  Scripture  ?  That  the  Word  of  God  is  embodied  in 
the  Bible  is  here,  at  least,  not  disputed;  that,  as  they  put 
It,  '  to  impute  blunders  to  the  Holy  Ghost  is  an  impiety,' 
cannot,  surely,  be  denied ;  that  '  to  bow  before  a  Divine 
statement  without  question  becomes  us  as  creatures  far 
better  than  stumbling  at  it,'  every  Christian  must  allow ; 
but  does  it  thence  follow  that  everything  found  within 
the  volume  which  contains  God's  word  is  as  sacred  and 
as  infallible  as  that  word  itself?  This  is  the  real  point 
in  question. 

Many  think  otherwise  ;  they  q^nnot  bring  themselves 
to  believe  that  it  is  either  safe  or  reverent  to  assume 
without  adequate  evidence  that  anything  is  properly 
speaking  Divine  which  is  contrary  to  what  is  elsewhere 
revealed  of  God,  anything  which,  when  examined  and 
tested  by  the  light  Christ  has  given  us,  is  incapable  of 
defence.  Well  may  such  persons  ask,  *  Is  it  right  to  stake 
the  truthfulness  of  the  Bible  on  the  accuracy  or  other- 
wise of  the  account  we  have  of  its  authorslnp,  or,  indeed, 
on  any  literary  question  whatever?  Is  it  either  wise  or 
just  to  affirm  that  the  exact  substance  of  a  statement,  the 
real  purport  of  what  may  have  been  spoken,  is  not  for 
all  practical  purposes  the  same  thing  as  the  very  words 
whicli  were  actually  uttered  ?'  Too  much  is  at  issue  to 
render  these  enquiries  other  than  of  vital  importance. 

The  question  of  hidden  tneaiiings  is  a  more  delicate 
one  to  deal  with,  for  if  we  must  of  necessity  hold  that 
every  text  (those  quoted  by  the  Evangelist  Matthew, 
for  instance)  had  in  it  originally  the  signification  which 
is  there  by  accommodation  implied  ;  if  the  writer  brings 
each  several  passage  from  the  Old  Testament  before  us, 


THE   MODERN    PHARISEE.  191 

not  as  jxn  illustration,  refulfilment,  or  reapplication  of 
what  had  occurred  long  before,  7iot  as  an  accommodation 
in  any  sense,  but  simply  as  a  development ;  if  we  are  to 
believe  that  the  beautiful  image  of  Rachel  weeping  for 
her  children  was  intended  by  him  who  first  used  it  as  a 
mystic  prophecy  of  the  massacre  at  Bethlehem ;  if  the 
words  of  Hosea, '  Out  of  Egypt  have  I  called  my  son,' 
embody  a  distinct  prophecy  of  the  flight  of  Joseph : 
t/ie7i  it  may  readily  be  granted  the  Bible  assumes  a 
character  which  obliges  us  to  admit  our  utter  incapacity 
to  understand  even  its  plainest  narratives. 

Further,  if  we  are  bound  to  interpret  the  Old  Testa- 
ment generally^  as  St.  Paul  in  some  cases  interprets  it ; 
if  we  are  to  find  in  every  historical  personage  a  type  of 
Christ ;  if  we  are  to  say  of  each  great  event  that  is 
recorded,  *  which  thing  is  an  allegory,'  and  to  expound 
accordingly  :  then.,  undoubtedly,  we  must  regard  every 
part  of  the  Bible  without  exception  as  inspired,  infal- 
lible, and  alas!  it  must  be  added,  miintelligible.  No- 
thing can  be  plainer  than  that,  if  this  be  the  case,  no 
uninspired  man  is  capable  of  interpreting  the  Bible ;  for 
who  would  consent  to  be,  in  this  respect,  at  the  mercy 
of  one  who,  for  aught  we  can  tell,  may  be  fanciful,  in- 
genious, or  weak  ?  Under  such  methods  Mr.  Jowett  is 
right  in  saying,  '  we  may  shut  our  lexicons  and  draw 
lots  for  the  sense.'  The  Jewish  rabbis,  by  following 
such  a  course  without  the  qualification  required — infd- 
lible  guidance — made,  as  our  Lord  Himself  tells  us,  'the 
word  of  God  of  none  eflfect.'  One  of  them,  it  is  said, 
actually  professed  to  teach  thirteen  different  methods  of 
expounding  the  plainest  declarations.  Short  of  inspira- 
tion, it  is  obviously  impossible  that  any  man  should  be 


192  LIBEK   LIBEORUM. 

qualified  to  interpret  Scripture  if  he  is  to  develop  what 
he  assumes  to  be  truth  out  of  the  Book,  instead  of  being 
content  to  accept  what  \\q  fields  there. 

The  only  answer  to  all  this  is  the  Chukch.  God, 
we  are  told,  has  provided  for  all  difficulty  by  giving  to 
His  Church — whether  represented  by  popes  or  councils, 
by  fathers  or  by  common  consent,  matters  not — povier 
and  authority  to  settle  all  disputed  points,  and  to  declare 
to  the  people  the  true  meaning  of  the  written  Word. 

Mr.  Burgon  soon  finds  himself  obliged  to  fall  back 
upon  this  doctrine.  '  God,'  he  says,  '  vouchsafes  to  His 
Church  effectual  guidance.  Want  of  faith  in  the  Church 
(by  which  he  understands  the  Church  of  England)  and 
her  ordinances  is  the  first  step  in  a  soul's  downward 
progress.'  To  imagine  oneself  a  disciple  of  Christ  or 
Paul,  and  so  to  disengage  oneself  from  the  history  of 
Christendom  and  the  after-thoughts  of  theology  is,  he 
thinks,  '  inordinate  conceit'  The  creeds,  he  assures  us, 
are  older  than  Scripture.  The  doctrines  of  the  Church 
were  not  found  in  Scripture ;  they  existed  before  it,  and 
are  only  proved  by  it.  He  speaks  of  these  creeds  as 
'  coeval  with  Christianity  itself,'  and  as  bearing  '  a 
solemn  independent  testimony  from  the  very  birthday 
of  Christianity.'  He  thinks  it  monstrous  to  suppose 
that  a  man  is  either  at  liberty  or  able  to  gather  his  own 
religion  for  himself  out  of  the  Bible.  Nor  are  we,  in 
England,  he  says,  thus  left.  *The  book  of  Common 
Prayer  is  a  sufficient  safeguard.' 

Nor  is  he  alone  in  this  view.  Another  distinguished 
man,  although  certainly  of  a  very  different  school — Dr. 
Rowland  Williams — tells  us  that  the  Church  is  '  an 
inspired  society ;'  that  *  the  Prayer  Book  is  constructed 


THE   MODERN    PHARISEE.  193 

on  this  idea ;'  and  tliat  the  Bible,  like  the  liturgy,  is 
*  the  written  voice  of  the  congregation.'  So  strangely 
do  extremes  sometimes  meet. 

It  may  not  be  unadvisable  here  to  separate  the  germ 
of  truth  which  is  found  in  these  observations  from  the 
mass  of  error  by  which  it  is  surrounded.  No  one  dis- 
putes that  the  Church  (that  is,  a  company  of  living 
believers  in  Christ)  was  called  into  existence  by  the 
Lord  and  His  Apostles  before  the  New  Testament  was 
written ;  but  it  owes  this  existence  to  the  word  which 
tlie  Scriptures  contain.  *  The  word  was  antecedent  to 
the  existence  of  the  Church,  as  the  cause  is  to  the  effect. 
The  im-iting  of  that  Word,  and  its  reception  when 
written,  were  subsequent  to  the  formation  of  the  Church 
(the  Christian  congregation  of  believers),  but  the  writ- 
ing only  made  permanent  for  future  time  the  Word  by 
which  the  Church  had  been  created;  and  the  reception 
of  the  writings  only  recognised  them  as  the  same  Word 
in  its  form  of  permanence.  Thus,  while  the  Church  is 
chronologically  before  the  Bible,  the  Bible  \s>  potentially 
before  the  Church ;  since  the  xoritten  Word,  which  is 
the  ground  of  faith  to  later  generations,  is  one  in  origin, 
authority,  and  substance  with  the  oral  Word,  which 
was  the  ground  of  faith  to  the  first  generation  of  Chris- 
tians.' ' 

Of  course,  neither  these  facts  nor  any  reasoning 
founded  thereon,  will  have  weight  with  persons,  and 
they  are  many,  who  are  determined,  at  all  hazards,  to 
uphold  ecclesiastical  authority ;  still  less  with  those 
who  tell  us  that  the  theological  theories  and  peculiar 
views  of  Paul  and  John — although  worthy  of  respect 
'  Bernard's  Bampton  Lectures. 


194:  LLBEB   LIBROKUM. 

because  worked  out  with  much  painful  thought — are  in 
no  respects  revelation^  or  at  all  binding  upon  others. 
For  here  again  extremes  meet.  The  Sceptic^  classing 
apostolic  developments  with  those  of  a  later  age,  neces- 
sarily plays  Irito  the  hands  of  those  who  maintain  a 
continual  inspiration  in  the  Church,  and  in  so  doing, 
whatever  he  may  intend,  practically  supports  its  claim 
to  an  authority  which,  if  not  absolute,  is  paramount  to 
every  other.  Some  Churchmeii  on  the  other  hand,  it 
may  be  feared,  by  the  arrogance  they  often  manifest, 
as  well  as  by  the  unreasonableness  of  the  pretensions 
they  put  forth,  drive  thoughtful  men  into  scepticism — a 
result  for  which  such  persons  care  little,  so  long  as  the 
esoteric  unbelief  is  concealed  by  an  exoteric  respect  for 
ecclesiastics. 

And  here  it  is  that  Romanism  harmonises  with  some 
extreme  forms  of  Anglicanism,  to  an  extent  that  may 
well  prepare  the  way  for  reunion.  Articles,  as  we 
have  seen,  can  be  easily  explained  away;  Ritualistic 
observances  may  be  practised  in  common ;  misunder- 
standings may,  without  difficulty,  be  removed;  all 
obstacles,  in  short,  may  soon  be  got  out  of  the  way,  if 
only  it  is  admitted  that  there  is  a  perpetual  inspiration 
in  the  Church,  carrying  with  it,  of  course,  everything 
that  is  necessarily  connected  therewith.  For  if,  as  this 
theory  supposes,  theology  is  a  science,  and  like  other 
sciences,  progressive ;  yet  progress,  as  Dr.  Dollinger 
puts  it,  'not  like  that  of  chemistry — since  there  can  be 
no  discovery  of  new  facts,  from  which  we  are  to  induce 
new  laws ;  but  a  progress  analogous  to  that  of  geometry 
— since  it  consists  in  the  gradual  evolution  of  the  fun- 
damental ideas,  the  discovery  of  new  relations  involved 


THE    MODEIiN    PHAKISEE.  195 

in  them,  and  new  spheres  in  which  they  are  valid ;'  if, 
we  repeat,  this  be  granted,  everything  is  yielded;  since 
only  authorised  teachers,  enjoying  the  perpetual  in- 
spiration assumed  to  be  in  the  Church,  can  be  fit  to 
evolve  fundamental  ideas,  to  discover  new  relations,  or 
to  decide  on  the  new  spheres  in  which  they  are  valid. 
On  this  showing,  the  subjection  of  mankind  everywhere 
to  an  organised  body  of  ecclesiastics  is  inevitable/ 

Only  let  this  great  end  be  secured,  and  then,  as  Dr. 
Pusey  has  told  us,  '  there  is  no  insurmountable  obstacle 
to  the  union  of  the  Roman,  Greek,  and  Anglican  com- 
munions.' A  submissive  return  to  the  authority  of  the 
Church  thus  becomes  our  only  chance  of  safety.  '  Dis- 
sent,' it  is  thought,  would,  under  such  circumstances, 
'  undoubtedly  break  in  pieces  beneath  the  silent  action 
of  universal  attraction;'  or,  loliich  is  far  more  prohabU^ 
be  broken  up  by  the  hammer  of  power. 

Let  us  look  these  matters  fairly  in  the  face.  The  fun- 
damental principle  underlying  all  that  agitates  us  in  the 
present  day  i-s,  a  claim,  common  alike  to  Roman  and 
Anglican,  to  an  uninterrupted  succession  of  the  aposto- 
late ;  to  a  teaching  authority,  akin  to  that  of  the  apos- 
tles, exercised  in  interpreting  the  doctrine  of  Jesus 
Christ;  to  the  exclusive  right  of  administering  what  are 
called  sacraments.  Truly  has  it  been  insisted  that  when 
the  Church  of  England  yields  this,  she  yields  all.  For, 
'  with  a  theory  that  so  closely  approximates  to  that  of 
Catholic  orthodoxy ;  with  a  liturgy  drawn  exclusively 
from  Catholic  sources ;  and  with  a  catechism  capable  of 
imbuing  the  minds  of  her  children  with  the  most  Catho- 
lic apprehension  of  the  two  principal  sacraments — Bap- 
^  See  Appendix.    Note  D.  'Church  Authority.' 


196  LIBER   LTBEOETTM. 

tism  and  the  Holy  Eucharist — who  can  doubt  the  ulti- 
mate reunion  of  the  Anglican  Church  with  the  rest  of 
Christendom  ?*  Our  choice,  then,  as  we  have  been  re- 
cently told,  lies  (and  lies  only)  '  between  a  Christianity 
organised,  hierarchical,  and  dogmatic,'  and  that  simple 
dependence  upon  God  alone,  which,  instead  of  produ- 
cing— as  some  preten«l  it  does — '  a  sinful  uncertainty  of 
mind,'  really  brings  with  it  peace  and  joy  in  believing, 
and  a  true  rest  in  the  Holy  Ghost. 

That  extreme  views  on  the  inspiration  of  Scripture, 
whether  called  plenary  or  verbal,  when  fearlessly  and 
logically  carried  out,  invariably  strengthen  the  hands  of 
the  enemy  is  but  too  clear.  They  inevitably  vest  the 
final  decision  as  to  what  the  Book  says  in  mem ;  its 
value,  thei-efore,  is  necessarily  dependent  on  the  exist- 
ence and  authority  of  an  organised  body  called  the 
Church. 

It  may  indeed  be  said,  and  truthfully,  that  among  the 
advocates  of  verbal  inspiration  and  an  infallible  book, 
may  be  found  a  multitude  who  expressly  repudiate 
Church  authority.  Those  who  do  so,  however,  com- 
monly fall  back  upon  what  in  reality  amounts  to  the 
same  thing — the  unquestioning  acceptance,  and,  where 
it  is  possible,  the  enforcement  of  an  hereditary  or  tradi- 
tional theology,  sometimes  expressed  in  catechisms  or 
other  official  documents,  and  sometimes  in  the  more 
stringent  form  of  public  opinion,  controlling  the  sect  to 
which  a  man  belongs.  Such  are  the  mischiefs  which 
inevitably  spring  from  modern  pharisaism,  and  its  idol- 
atry of  the  Bible.' 

On  the  other  hand,  supposing  all  that  has  been  ad- 
^  See  Appendix.     Note  E.  'The  Idolatry  of  the  Bible.' 


THE   MODERN   PUAEISEE.  197 

vanced  to  be  true,  and  that  the  distinction  drawn  be- 
tween the  historical  and  the  ethical  portions  of*  the  Bible 
is  a  just  one — that  some  things,  therefore,  in  Scripture 
are  not  properly  God-breathed  communications— ?oAa^ 
have  we  lost  f  By  how  much  are  we  tlie  poorer  ?  What 
consolations  have  fled  ?  What  pillar  has  been  withdrawn 
from  the  great  spiritual  edifice  ?,  To  what  extent,  and 
in  what  way,  is  the  Bible  less  to  us  than  it  was  before  ? 
Surely  it  is  hard  to  see  that  anything  whatever  has  even 
been  impaired  in  worth. 

But  it  may  be  replied,  '  WJiat  have  loe  gained F 
ISTothing,  assuredly,  in  the  way  of  compromise  with  the 
unbeliever.  Nothing  which,  in  itself,  is  likely  to  render 
either  Christ  or  his  Gospel  less  distasteful  than  it  has 
always  been  to  the  worldly  and  the  profane.  Something, 
however,  can  scarcely  fail  to  have  been  accomplished 
towards  strengthening  the  faith  of  a  class  who  have  had 
their  confidence  in  Divine  truth  shaken  by  assertions 
w^hich  will  not  bear  close  examination.  Something,  it 
may  be  hoped,  towards  satisfymg  such  persons  that 
instructed  Christians  do  not  believe  that  the  Bible  can 
be  explained  away,  or  that  criticism  can,  step  by  step, 
undermine  its  revelations.  Something,  it  may  perhaps 
be  added,  tOAvards  the  comfort  of  hope  in  souls  that  have 
stumbled  at  the  word,  7iot  because  of  disobedience,  but 
because  under  that  name  they  have  confused  the  human 
with  the  Divine.  Something,  therefore,  towards  the 
removal  of  perplexities  from  minds  that  have  dwelt  with 
a  morbid  interest  on  difiiculties  for  which  revelation  is 
aot  responsible,  and  which,  if  incapable  of  being  alto- 
gether removed  may,  at  least,  be  so  diminished  as  to  lose 
their  importance,  and  cease  to  have  mischievous  effects. 


CHAPTER    XI 


A   POSTSCEIPT. 


Two  or  three  objections  relative  to  matters  discussed 
m  the  foregoing  pages  having  been  made  in  the  various 
conversations  which  the  author  has  had  with  intelligent 
doubters  and  others,  he  refers  to  them  here  in  order  that 
they  may  be  taken  for  what  they  are  worth.  The  first 
has  been  put  thus  : — 

'  You  seem  to  think  that  the  sceptic,  while  denying 
the  authority  of  the  Gospels,  is  inconsistent  enough  to 
give  the  evangelists  credit  for  truly  recording  what  ap- 
peared  to  them  to  be  miraculous  occurrences.  This,  how- 
ever, is  not  the  fact,  since  the  unbeliever  does  not  admit 
for  a  moment  that  the  narratives  were  written  down  by 
eye-witnesses.  Regarding  the  Gospels  as  having  been 
penned  at  least  half  a  century  after  the  events  they  pro- 
fess to  record,  he  holds  that  the  writers,  whoever  they 
might  be,  merely  express  the  opinions  of  the  day  in 
which  they  wrote  respecting  the  facts ;  that  the  narra- 
tives they  give  are  not  properly  speaking  facts,  but  the 
interpretations  of  a  later  age  respecting  the  facts.  He 
considers  that  a  halo  of  wonder  and  supernaturalism 
gre^o  around  the  history  of  Christianity  in  the  early  part 
of  the  first  century,  and  that  this  was  reflected  in  the 


A    POSTSCRIPT.  199 

writings  of  the  evangelists.  The  dilemma,  therefore,  so 
often  put,  that  these  writers  were  either  deceived  or 
deceivers,  he  argues,  falls  to  the  ground.  They  need 
not,  he  says,  have  been  either.  The  writers  necessarily 
put  upon  the  evangelic  history  the  coloring  of  the  tra- 
ditional sources  from  which  it  was  derived ;  they  could 
not  have  done  otherwise.  How  many  times,  he  ex- 
claims, in  the  world's  history  has  a  mass  of  supernatural 
belief  groion  round  a  nucleus  of  the  purest  religious 
idea!  All  religions  are  more  or  less  cradled  in  such  be- 
liefs. Hence  a  man  may  deny  the  supernatural  in  the 
Bible  and  yet  be  a  good  Christian  after  all.  Christian- 
ity is  an  all-embracing  reality;  it  has  actually  moulded 
the  whole  civilisation  of  the  modern  world;  it  lives  in 
society,  speaks  in  our  laws,  and  breathes  more  or  less  in 
the  thoughts,  feelings,  and  moral  principles  of  every 
good  man,  whatever  may  be  his  speculative  difficulties. 
Such  an  one  cannot  strip  himself  of  Christianity  if  he 
would ;  and,  therefore,  whatever  you  may  call  him,  he 
is  a  Christian,  for  his  nature  has  been  moulded  by 
Christian  influences.' 

We  reply :  '  Belief  in  the  miracles  of  our  Lord  and 
His  disciples  does  not  depend  on  the  amount  of  evidence 
which  can  be  brought  forward  in  support  either  of  the 
authorship  of  the  Gospels  or  of  the  precise  time  when 
they  were  composed.  Christianity  itself,  apart  alto- 
gether from  the  particular  narratives  in  question,  rests 
on  miracle.  If  Christ  be  not  risen  Christianity  is  a  mere 
delusion.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  Redeemer  did  rise 
from  the  dead  the  supernatural  is  admitted. 

To  regard  the  statements  of  the  evangelists — calm, 
unexcited,  colorless  as   they  confessedly  are — as  mere 


200  LIBER   LIBROEUM. 

representations  of  tlie  excited  thoughts  and  feelings  of 
a  later  age,  tinged,  or  rather  tainted,  as  in  this  case 
they  must  be,  by  the  traditional  sources  from  which 
they  were  derived,  is,  to  say  the  very  least  of  it,  every 
way  improbable,  '  a  most  unlikely  guess '  at  the  best. 
Nothing,  indeed,  strikes  one  more  than  the  compara- 
tively little  effect  which,  according  to  the  narrative,  tbe 
miracles  appear  to  have  produced  beyond  the  limited 
circles  in  which  they  were  performed.  So  abundant 
were  they,  so  quietly  were  they  wrought,  so  unpretend- 
ing was  the  character  of  the  worker,  and  so  practically 
benevolent  His  end  and  aim,  that  they  scarcely  seem  to 
have  been  regarded  as  wonders.  The  demand  still  was, 
'  give  us  a  sign,'  as  if  signs  in  abundance  were  not 
observable  on  every  hand. 

The  fact  that  one  great  section  of  the  Jews — the 
Pharisees — regarded  the  entire  national  history  as  mi- 
raculous, and  lived  and  died  in  constant  expectation  of 
a  supernatural  deliverer ;  that  another  section — the  Sad- 
ducees — denied  the  spiritual  world  altogether ;  and  that 
a  third — the  Herodians — had  become  bound  up  with 
the  support  of  things  as  they  then  were,  far  from  being 
favourable  to  an  easy  credulity  in  relation  to  Christian- 
ity, must  have  wrought  in  an  opposite  direction.  Those 
who  believed  that  their  '  own  children '  could  miracu- 
lously cast  out  devils ;  Herod,  who  thought  that  John 
the  Baptist  had  risen  from  the  dead,  and  the  many  who 
considered  Christ  to  be  '  Elias,  or  one  of  the  prophets ' 
reappearing  upon  earth,  were  none  of  them  men  who, 
like  modern  sceptics,  would  deny  the  supernatural  alto- 
gether. Rather  would  they,  as  believers  in  the  possi- 
bility of  miracles,  look   the   more  narrowly  into   the 


A    POSTSCRIPT.  201 

reality  of  those  which  were  professedly  wrought  by 
Jesus  and  His  apostles.  That  they  did  so,  and  found 
themselves  unable  to  do  more  than  attribute  what  they 
could  not  deny  to  the  agency  of  Beelzebub,  is  evidence 
that  the  lapse  of  half  a  century  was  not  needed  in  order 
to  account  for  miraculous  claims — that  this  element, 
however  it  may  be  regarded,  was  certainly  not  an  after- 
growth. 

Had  there  been  in  our  Lord's  time  a  prevailing  dis- 
belief in  miracles,  and  half  a  century  later  a  revived 
faith  in  them,  there  might  be  at  least  some  plausible 
ground  for  supposing  that  this  element  gathered  in  the 
course  of  years  around  what  was  once  only  a  religious 
idea.  But  there  is  no  pretext  for  such  a  conclusion. 
Equally  unreasonable  is  it  to  assume  that  no  record  was 
made  of  the  facts  by  eye-witnesses,  and  at  the  time  the 
events  occurred;  that  side  by  side  with  a  large  body  of 
persecuted  believers,  and  with  fixed  institutions  estab- 
lished as  memorials  of  supposed  facts,  nothing  should 
exist  relating  thereto  beyond  dim,  hazy,  and  untrust- 
worthy traditions. 

The  absurdity  of  the  notion  that  every  man  is  a 
Christian  whose  nature  has,  in  spite  of  himself,  been 
moulded  by  Christian  influences,  whatever  may  be  the 
amount  of  his  unbelief,  is  obvious,  since  on  this  show- 
ing, any  virtuous  Jew  or  heathen,  who,  from  whatever 
circuuistance,  has  come  under  the  soul-elevating  power 
of  the  ethical  element  in  the  New  Testament,  has  a 
claim  to  be  embraced  in  the  Christian  fellowship,  which, 
if  faith  in  the  Redeemer  be  anything  at  all,  is  simply  an 
extravagance. 
9* 


202  LIBER   LIBEORUM. 

« 

The  second  objection  taken  is  of  a  directly  opposite 
character,  and  may  be  expressed  thus : — 

'  It  is  not  safe  to  allow  that  any  sceptic  can,  in  a  true 
sense,  be  religious.  No  man  can,  properly  speaking,  be 
such  who  rejects  the  basis  on  which  all  practical  virtue 
rests.  No  one  can  be  good,  so  long  as  the  root  from 
which  his  supposed  goodness  springs  is  itself  but  rot- 
tenness.' 

To  this  sweeping  refusal  to  allow  any  quarter  to  the 
doubter,  it  may  be  replied  that  we  have  no  right  to 
reject  the  testimony  of  Christian  men  who  know  such 
persons  well,  and  testify  of  some,  at  least,  that  their 
lives  are  pure,  their  spirit  unworldly,  and  their  scepti- 
cism reluctant.  We  have  no  right  to  assume  that  these 
men  reject  Christ,  or  that  the  root  from  which  their 
virtues  spring  is  rottetmess.  How  much  truth  may  be 
doubted,  or  even  denied,  without  spiritual  death,  it  is 
in  many  cases  impossible  for  us  to  say;  but  we  are 
surely  justified  in  believing  that  where  men,  though  'per- 
plext  in  faith,  are  pure  in  deeds,'  where  reverence  for 
Scripture  has  not  been  cast  off,  where  difiiculties  relate 
not  so  much  to  revealed  facts  as  to  human  deductions 
intermingled  therewith,  there  is  good  reason  for  cher- 
ishing hopes  which,  at  least,  forbid  us  to  denounce 
without  discrimination. 

It  must,  however,  be  admitted  that  the  union  of  prin- 
ciples which  are  pre-eminently  Christian  with  the  abso- 
lute rejection  of  Christ,  is  a  feature  peculiar  to  the 
unbelief  of  the  present  day,  and  that  it  is  one  which 
carries  with  it  no  common  danger.  The  recent  appear- 
ance of  a  volume  of  essays,  written  by  Englishmen  of 
high  talent  and  standing,  '  avowedly  for  the  purpose  of 


A   POSTSOKIPT.  203 

advocating  certain  views  derived  from  the  writings  of 
M.  Comte,'  is  indeed  a  sign  of  the  times,  since  Comte 
not  only  held  that  the  Roman  Catholic  system  was  the 
only  genuine  form  of  Christianity,  but  proposes  to  '  or- 
ganise the  education  of  the  West  by  means  of  a  body 
or  order,  which  can  only  rest  as  its  prototype,  the 
Catholic  system  did,  on  a  community  of  faith.' ' 

*  The  writers  of  the  Essays  generally  regard  Christian 
influences  as  pernicious,  and  there  is  hardly  an  essay  in 
the  volume  which  is  free  from  attacks  upon  it ;  in  some 
of  the  essays  they  abound,  and  are  supported  by  mis- 
representations of  Christian  teaching.  Everywhere  the 
quiet  assumption  is  made  that  Christianity  is  a  thing  of 
the  past,  doomed,  and  rapidly  passing  away.  Protest- 
antism M.  Comte  never  spoke  of  but  with  a  protest  as 
against  a  shapeless  anarchical  system,  and  he  talks  of 
being  preserved  from  it  with  an  unction  worthy  of  a 
Romish  zealoti'  And  yet  the  book  contains  very  much 
that   is  good.     The  motto  taken  as   the  guide   of  all 

^  The  Essayists  are  Richard  Congreve,  M.  A.,  late  Fellow  and 
Tutor  of  Wadhara  College,  Oxford ;  Frederick  Harrison,  M.  A., 
Fellow  and  late  Tutor  of  Wadham  College,  Oxford ;  E.  S.  Beealy, 
M.  A.,  of  Wadham  College,  Oxford,  Professor  of  History  at  Uni- 
versity College,  London;  E.  H.  Pember,  M,  A.,  late  Student  of 
Christ  Church,  Oxford ;  J.  H.  Bridges,  M.  B.,  late  Fellow  of  Oriel 
College,  Oxford;  Charles  A.  Cookson,  B.  A.,  of  Oriel  College,-  Ox- 
ford ;  and  Henry  Dix  Hutton,  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  Barrister-at-Law.  In 
the  paragraphs  inserted  referring  to  the  work,  it  has  been  thought 
better  to  adopt  the  account  given  of  it  by  the  Rev.  W.  H.  Fremantle, 
M.  A.,  in  the  Cotemp.  Rev.  (xii.)  than  to  offer  any  anonymous  criti- 
cism. Mr.  Fremantle's  name  and  position  furnish  an  adequate 
guarantee  for  the  truthfulness  of  his  statements.  The  title  of  the 
book  is  '  International  Policy :  Essays  on  the  Foreign  Relations  of 
England,'    Chapman  and  Hall. 


204  LIBEE   LIBKOEUM. 

moral  and  political  speculation  is  one  which  every  true 
Christian  echoes  from  the  bottom  of  his  heart — '  Vivre 
pour  autrui.' 

*  The  constant  reference  is  to  a  certain  ultimate  state 
of  human  society  which  is  believed  to  be  approaching, 
and  of  which  the  secret,  though  not  explained,  is  sup- 
posed to  be  with  the  writers.'  Into  any  details  re- 
lating thereto,  so  far  as  they  can  be  gathered,  it  is  here 
impossible  to  enter ;  but  there  is  to  be  'a  high  priest 
of  humanity,  who  will  be,  more  truly  than  any  mediae- 
val pope,  the  only  real  head  of  the  Western  world;' 
there  are  to  be  prayers,  and  priests,  and  sacraments,  and 
by  these  the  whole  world  is  to  be  regenerated.  '  Once,' 
it  is  said,  '  let  the  reorganisation  of  the  West  be  fairly 
secure,  and  a  noble  proselytism  will  become  the  princi- 
pal collective  occupation  of  the  positive  priesthood.' 

A  wild  dream  this  must  of  necessity  aj^pear  to  every 
sensible  man,  and  yet,  if  M.  Comte's  notions  were  mere 
hypotheses,  liable  to  all  manner  of  changes  by  his  fol- 
lowers, why  should  we  be  constantly  reminded,  in  a 
solemn  manner,  that  we  are  in  a  state  of  transition,  and 
that  some  final  state,  which  M.  Comte's  disciples  know 
of,  is  at  hand  to  supersede  the  present  transitional 
state,  or  state  anarchy,'  by  which  terms  the  present  con- 
dition of  Europe  is  constantly  denoted  ? 

^  *  The  system  of  this  book,  (International  Policy),  says  Mr.  Har- 
rison in  the  second  essay  (p.  152),  'has  already  been  stated  in  earlier 
pages  (Mr.  Congreve's  Essay,  pp.  36  and  41) ;  it  implies  the  organisa- 
tion of  the  West,  upon  a  system  of  common  moral  and  intellectual 
principles,  and  on  one  uniform  tone  of  public  and  private  life  ;  the 
whole  animated  ind  knit  together  by  a  common  education  and  a 
common  body  of  intellectual  teachers  and  guides.  How  far  we  are 
from  ihe  reaUsation  of  this,  it  is  not  the  part  of  this  work  to  consider.' 


A   POSTSCRIPT.  205 

Nor  should  it  be  unnoticed — although  the  authors  of 
the  volume  are  probably  'quite  unaware  of  the  fact — 
that  writers  on  prophecy  have,  for  the  last  thirty  years, 
amid  no  little  scorn,  been  repeating  their  conviction 
that  the  advent  of  some  organisation  of  the  kind  anti- 
cipated is  shadowed  forth  in  the  Apocalypse,  and  there 
associated  with  bitter  and  bloody  persecution,  under 
the  headship  of  the  last  form  of  Antichrist. 

Such,  then,  is  one  phase,  and  by  no  means  an  unim- 
portant one,  of  the  unbelief  of  the  present  day.  Chris- 
tianity scorned,  and  its  missions  derided,  yet  selfishness 
condemned,  duty  made  supreme,  the  whole  of  Western 
Europe  looked  upon  as  one  great  commonwealth,  with 
common  sympathies  and  objects,  each  nation  desirous 
of  the  good  of  the  whole,  rather  than  of  its  own,  and  all 
combining  to  spread  their  common  civilisation  among 
the  other  races  of  mankind. 

With  one  thing  it  is  impossible  to  help  being  struck, 
viz.,  the  singular  change  that  has  taken  place  in  the 
relative  positions  of  Christianity  and  its  opposite  since 
Robert    Hall    pubhshed    his     celebrated    sermon    on 

*  Modern  Infidelity.'     TJien  scepticism  was  described  as 

*  essentially  and  infallibly  a  system  of  enervation,  turpi- 
tude, and  vice,'  leading  to  *  the  frequent  perpetration 
of  great  crimes,  and  the  total  absence  of  great  virtues.' 
Now^  the  clergy  are  warned  by  this  same  school  that 
'no  religious  organisation  can  long  hold  its  ground  in 
popular  esteem  when  confronted  by  a  loftier  morality 
than  its  own.'  Then  it  was  said  of  unbelief,  '  attention 
to  self  is  the  spring  of  every  movement  and  the  motive 
to  which  every  action  is  referred.'  Now  the  motto 
taken  as  a  guide  by  them  is  '  Vivre  pour  autrui,'  and 


206  LIEEK   LIBKOEUM. 

the  principle  kept  continually  in  view,  '  The  subordina- 
tion of  politics  to  morals.'     • 

Then  priests  of  all  kinds,  simply  as  such,  were  hated. 
JVoio  an  order  so  called  is  regarded  as  essential  to  the 
regeneration  of  the  world.  The?i  Rome  and  unbelief 
appeared  to  have  little  or  nothing  in  common.  J)^ow, 
whether  consciously  or  unconsciously,  they  habitually 
support  and  strengthen  each  other.  The?i  unbelievers 
alleged  it  to  be  a  grievous  defect  in  the  morality  of  the 
Gospel,  that  it  neglected  to  inculcate  patriotism,  and  the 
Christian  advocate  had  to  urge  that  it  was  wise  in  God 
'to  decline  the  express  inculcation  of  a  principle  so  liable 
to  degenerate  into  excess.'  JVow  we  are  told  our  great 
object  should  be  *to  bring  into  political  relations  the 
spirit  of  unselfishness,'  and  to  regard  love  of  country  as 
a  great  evil  when  it  c'onflicts  with  the  love  of  the  human 
race. 

And  yet,  in  spite  of  all  these  differences,  the  old 
hatred  to  Christianity  prevails,  and  greatly  should  we 
err  if  we  concluded  that  any  essential  change  had 
actually  taken  place.  It  still  remains  certain  that 
'  whenever  the  religious  feeling  or  instinct  in  man 
works  freely,  without  an  historical  revelation,  it  must 
beget  a  system  of  priestcraft ;  an  intellectual  priest- 
hood it  may  be,  but  inevitably  one  more  intolerant, 
exclusive,  and  oppressive  than  any  other  with  which 
the  world  has  ever  been  cursed.'^ 

The  third  objection,  different  from  either  of  the  pre- 
ceding, will,  it  is  to  be  feared,  be  a  popular  one.  It 
runs  thus: — 

'  Why  meddle  at  all  with  this  difficult  and  dangerous 
^  See  Maurice's  Lectures  on  the  Religions  of  the  World. 


A   POSTSCRIPT.  207 

subject  ?  True  Christians,  resting  in  implicit  faith  on 
Scripture,  can  only  be  unsettled  and  injured  by  learning 
that  there  is  even  room  for  a  doubt  legarding  the  ab- 
solute inspiration  of  any  portion  of  the  Bible.  If  there 
is  indeed  a  weak  point  in  the  arguments  usually  brought 
forward  to  support  either  the  plenary  or  verbal  theory, 
far  better  is  it  to  throw  a  cloak  over  such  a  defect  than 
to  unveil  it  before  the  world,  however  good  may  be  the 
intention.  Belief  in  what  the  Bible  contains  is  neces- 
sarily to  most  persons  a  prejudice,  and  the  cases  are 
few  in  which  this  can  be  exchanged  for  a  conviction. 
Why  then  shake  a  prejudice  which  is  so  useful  when 
you  are  unable  to  ensure  its  being  superseded  by  any- 
thing better  ? 

'To  the  sceptic  you  can  do  no  good.  His  mind  is 
made  up  to  reject  a  revelation  which,  if  true,  condemns 
him.  He  will  only  argue  from  your  adniissions  that  if 
it  is  lawful  to  draw  any  line  between  the  inspired  and 
uninspired  in  Scripture,  the  whole  question  of  its  accept- 
ance or  rejection  comes  to  be  one  of  degree  only.  The 
same  criticism  which  you  think  justifies  doubt  in  relation 
to  the  narrative  of  the  execution  of  Saul's  seven  sons, 
carries  him  somewhat  further,  and  if  he  ends  in  excluding 
the  story  of  the  Resurrection  itself,  he  has  only  to  thank 
you  for  the  example.' 

We  reply  :  The  ground  here  taken  assumes  that  it  is 
better  for  men  to  abide  in  error,  if  it  can  be  made  use- 
ful, than  to  arrive  at  truth  if  accompanied  by  possible 
danger.  It  is  the  old  distrust  of  the  merely  true  as  such, 
and  so  far  indicates  want  of  confidence  in  Him  who  is 
emphatically  '  the  Truth.'  Such  is  essentially  the  spirit 
of  Rome,  for  it  proceeds  on  the  supposition  that  men 


208  LIBER   LIBKOEUM. 

must,  at  all  hazards,  be  led  into  what  may  be  regarded 
as  the  right  jDath,  whatever  may  be  the  means  used. 
The  end  sanctifies  all.  This  course  is  an  immoral  one, 
and  cannot  therefore  be  sustained.  An  unshaken  faith 
in  God,  in  truth,  and  in  uprightness  can  alone  deliver  us 
from  the  wretched  delusion  involved  in  all  such  miserable 
expedients. 

That  any  true  Christian  is  likely  to  have  his  confi- 
dence shaken  by  honest  investigation  is  not  to  be 
believed  for  a  moment  by  anyone  who  really  considers 
what  Divine  trust  is,  and  the  grounds  on  which  it  rests. 
That  the  hardened  sceptic  may  be  incapable  of  estimat- 
ing the  force  of  any  reasoning  which  is  presented  to  him 
in  favour  of  the  authority  of  the  Bible  is  likely  enough. 
But  let  us  remember  that  the  man  thus  spoken  of  was 
not  always  unimpressible.  There  was,  in  all  probability, 
a  time  in  his  mental  history,  as  there  has  been  in  that 
of  most  of  us,  when  the  syren  voice  of  the  doubter  was 
listened  to  with  a  strange  admixture  of  fear  and  wonder; 
when  its  charm  was  found  rather  in  the  feeling  of  inde- 
pendence that  it  flattered  than  in  the  force  of  its  sugges- 
tions ;  when  a  bold  treatment  would  have  been  success- 
ful;  when  an  opposite  course— timidity,  distrust  denun- 
ciation— on  the  part  of  the  believer  proved  fatal.  It  is 
for  men  in  this  stage — and  at  the  present  moment  they 
are  a  countless  multitude — that  we  now  write.  Should 
they  reflect  on  that  which  has  been  written  it  may 
surely  be  expected  that  to  some  the  Book  will  be  found 
beneficial,  a  hope  which  we  would  on  no  account  ex- 
change for  the  plaudits  of  a  world,  however  '  religious  ' 
that  '  world  '  might  call  itself. 

As  for  the  pretence — for  it  is  really  nothing  better — 


A   POSTSCRIPT.  209 

that  to  give  up  anything  in  the  Bible  is  in  effect  to  give 
np  all ;  that  if  a  line  is  to  be  drawn  anywhere  its  place 
must  be  fixed  by  the  caprice  of  the  reader;  it  is  enough 
to  observe  that  the  real  question  is  7iot  how  much  or 
how  little  may  be  regarded  as  human  in  Scripture,  but 
o;i  ichat  ground  the  distinction  in  question  is  proposed 
to  be  made.  Reason,  it  is  granted,  is  not  in  itself  ade- 
quate to  judge  as  to  what  is  or  is  not  worthy  of  God. 
Taste,  caprice,  preconceptions  of  any  kind  have  nothing 
whatever  to  do  with  the  matter.  If  the  rebuke  to 
Balaam  or  the  deliverance  of  Jonah  are  to  be  rejected 
because  it  seems  incredible  or  grotesque  that  an  ass 
should  speak  or  a  whale  disgorge  its  living  burden,  we 
adopt  a  principle  which  certainly  leads  to  the  constnic- 
tion  rather  than  to  the  reception  of  a  Divine  revelation. 
But  if,  on  the  contrary,  we  confine  ourselves  to  the  test 
of  congruity  ;  if  we  accept  or  reject  07ily  on  the  ground 
of  the  harmony  or  want  of  harmony  which  a  statement 
has  with  other  revelations,  with  all  that  God  has  taught 
us  whether  by  the  servant  or  by  the  Son  regarding  His 
own  character  and  will ;  if  we  do  this  in  dependence  on 
the  teaching  of  that  Spirit  which,  as  an  unction  from  the 
Holy  One,  is  given  to  '  the  lowly  heart  and  pure ;'  if  we 
but  follow  the  example  of  those  early  Christians  who 
tried  the  spirits  whether  they  were  of  God  or  not,  we 
may  be  quite  sure  that  the  danger  supposed  is  altogether 
imaginary,  and  that  'the  honest  mind,  calmly  seeking 
after  God's  truth  in  the  spirit*  He  approves,  will  not  be 
at  a  loss  to  make  sufficient  distinction  between  religious 
or  ethical  truth  and  departments  belonging  to  the  natu- 
ral and  human.' 

He  who  wishes  to  confound  them  will  easily  succeed 


210  LIBEE  LIBRORUM. 

ill  doing  so ;  but  '  he  who  sincerely  seeks  to  distinguish 
the  minor  parts,  in  which  the  correctness  of  inspiration 
does*  not  necessarily  lie,  from  the  moral  and  religious 
elements  constituting  revelation  proper,'  may  do  so 
without  difficulty.  '  The  religious  and  theological  ele- 
ment,' says  Dr.  Pye  Smith,  '  or  whatever  contains  reli- 
gious truth,  precept,  or  expectation,  cannot  hut  appear 
perfectly  distinct  and  manifest  to  any  man  who  under- 
stands language,  and  is  not  previously  determined  to 
pervert  what  is  plainly  before  his  eyes.' 

One  word  more.  Experience  has  taught  us  that,  in 
the  present  day,  the  rejection  of  the  Bible  is  almost  in- 
variably followed  by  painful  questionings,  sometimes  as 
to  the  existence  and  sometimes  as  to  the  character  of 
God.  Let  us  realise  the  fact  that  it  can  scarcely  ever 
be  otherwise.  Apart  from  Scripture,  it  is  impossible  to 
know  anything  of  the  Creator  which  can  assure  us  either 
of  His  presence  or  His  will ;  of  Plis  relation  to  us  or  of 
our  condition  before  Him.  How  important,  then,  is  it 
that  the  first  beginnings  of  doubt  should  be  honestly 
dealt  with  !  How  foolish  to  think  or  speak  of  the  ac- 
ceptance or  rejection  of  'the  Book'  as  a  light  thing,  so 
long  as  we  come  under  the  influences  which  Christianity 
has  difiused  over  the  globe.  The  truth  or  falsehood  of 
the  Bible,  its  worth  or  its  worthlessness,  is  the  great 
question  of  the  day.  It  is  not  too  much  to  afiirm  that 
the  life  or  death  of  modern  society  hangs  upon  the  issue. 


NOTES 


A.     (Chap.  ii.  p.  G5.) 
EMINENT  WITNESSES. 

The  following,  among  others,  may  be  quoted  : — 

HooKEE,  'As  incredible  praises  given  unto  men  do  often 
abate  and  impair  the  credit  of  their  deserved  commendation, 
so  we  must  likewise  take  great  heed,  lest  in  attributing  unto 
Scripture  more  than  it  can  have,  the  incredibility  of  that  do 
cause  even  those  things  which  indeed  it  hath  most  abundantly 
to  be  less  esteemed.'  ^ 

Baxter  (Richard).  '  Here  I  must  tell  you  a  great  and  need- 
ful truth,  which  ignorant  Christians,  fearing  to  confess,  by 
overdoing  tempt  men  to  infidelity.  The  Scripture  is  like  a 
man's  body,  where  some  parts  are  but  for  the  preservation  of 
tlie  rest,  and  may  be  maimed  without  death.  The  sense  is 
the  soul  of  the  Scripture,  and  the  letters  but  the  body  or 
vehicle.' ' 

TiLLOTSON  (Archbishop).  '  If  any  man  is  of  opinion  that 
Moses  might  write  the  history  of  those  actions  which  he  him- 
self did,  or  was  present  at,  without  an  immediate  revelation 
of  them;  or  that  Solomon,  by  his  natural  and  acquired  wis- 
dom, might  speak  those  wise  sayings  which  are  in  his  Proverbs ; 
or  that  the  Evangelists  might  write  what  they  heard  and  saw, 
or  what  they  had  good  assurance  of  from  others,  as  St.  Luke 
tells  us  he  did  ;  or  that  St.  Paul  might  write  for  his  cloak  and 

1  ILookor,  p.  274.  »  Worusworth's  Christian  Institutes. 


212  NOTES. 

parchment  at  Troas,  and  salute  by  name  his  friends  and 
brethren ;  or  that  he  might  advise  Timothy  to  drink  a  little 
wine,  &c.,  without  the  immediate  dictate  of  the  Spirit  of 
God:  he  seems  to  have  reason  on  his  side.' ' 

Waebueton.  'Thus  Ave  see  the  advantages  resulting  from 
a  Partial  Inspiration  as  here  contended  for  and  explained  ; 
it  answers  all  the  ends  of  a  Scripture  universally  and  organ- 
ically inspired,  by  producing  an  unerring  rule  of  faith  and 
manners  ;  and,  besides,  obviates  all  tliose  objections  to  inspira- 
tion which  arise  from  the  too  high  notion  of  it,  such  as  trifling 
errors  in  circumstances  of  small  importance.' ' 

Paley.  '  The  books  (of  the  Old  Testament)  were  universally 
read  and  received  by  the  Jews  of  our  Saviour's  time.  He  and 
His  apostles,  in  common  with  all  other  Jews,  referred  to  them, 
alluded  to  them,  used  them :  yet,  except  where  he  expressly 
ascribes  a  Divine  authority  to  particular  predictions,  I  do  not 
know  that  we  can  strictly  draw  any  conclusion  from  the  books 
being  so  used  and  applied,  besides  the  proof  which  it  unques- 
tionably is,  of  their  notoriety  and  rece[)tion  at  that  time.'  ^ 

Scott  (Thomas).  'By  the  Divine  inspiration  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  I  mean  such  an  immediate  and  complete  discovery 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  minds  of  the  sacred  penmen  of  those 
things  tchich  could  not  have  been  otherwise  hioion^  and  such  an 
e£Pectual  superintending  as  to  those  things  which  they  might 
be  informed  of  by  other  means,  as  entirely  to  preserve  them 
from  error  in  every  particular  which  could  in  the  least  degree 
affect  any  of  the  doctrines  or  commandments  contained.'  * 

Watson  (Bishop).  'As  to  the  apostles  themselves,  when- 
ever they  wrote  or  spoTce  concerning  Christianity  that  fund  of 
inspiration  kept  them  right.  But  they  were  reasonable 
creatures  as  well  as  inspired  apostles,  and  therefore  could 
speak  or  write  about  common  affairs  as  men  that  have  the  use 
of  their  reason  without  any  inspiration  can  easily  do.'  ^ 

1  Sermon  168,  p.  449,  fol.  4  Essays,  p.  8. 

9  Works,  4to,  1778,  pp.  556,  557.  «»  Tracts,  p.  446. 

*  Evidences  of  Christianity,  p.  291. 


EMINENT   WITNESSFS.  213 

ToMLFNE  (Bishop).  '  They  (the  sacred  penmen)  were  some- 
times left  to  the  common  use  of  their  faculties,  and  did  not 
upon  every  occasion  stand  in  need  of  supernatural  communica- 
tion ;  but  whenever  and  as  far  as  the  Divine  assistance  was 
necessary  it  was  always  afforded,' ' 

"Whately  (Archbishop).  '  In  the  first  place  we  should  bear 
in  mind  what  parts  of  the  Bible  are  to  be  regarded  as  strictly 
and  properly  bearing  the  character  of  revelation.  A  great 
part  of  it  is  historical ;  and  though  we  believe  the  sacred  his- 
torians to  have  been  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to 
lead  them  into  all  necessary  religious  truth^  to  guard  them 
against  any  material  error,  and  in  some  few  cases,  to  inform 
them  of  what  could  not  be  known  by  human  means;  yet,  the 
very  nature  of  history  is  such  that  it  would  be  unreasonable 
to  expect  to  find  each  single  event  that  is  narrated  to  be  a 
matter  of  high  importance.'  ^ 

Hinds  (Bishop).  '  To  Religious  instruction  of  whatever 
kind  is  confined  the  Scriptural  character  of  Scripture,  the 
agency  of  the  Holy  Spieit.  It  is  not,  therefore,  truth  of  all 
kinds  that  the  Bible  was  inspired  to  teach,  but  only  such 
truth  as  tends  to  religious  edification ;  and  the  Bible  is  conse- 
quently infallible  as  regards  this,  and  this  alone.'  ^ 

Smith  (Dr.  Pye).  '  I  regard  as  inspired  Scripture  all  that 
refers  to  holy  things^  all  that  can  bear  the  character  of 
"Oracles  of  God,"  and  admit  the  rest  as  appendages  of  the 
nature  of  private  memoirs  or  public  records,  useful  to  the 
antiquary  and  the  philologist,  but  which  belong  not  to  the 
rule  of  faith  or  the  directory  of  practice.  To  this  extent,  and 
this  only,  can  I  regard  the  sanction  of  the  New  Testament  as 
given  to  the  inspiration  of  the  Old.  Inspiration  belongs  to 
Religious  objects,  and  to  attach  it  to  other  things  is  to  lose 
sight  of  its  nature,  and  misapply  its  design.' 

'  I  can  find  no  end  of  my  anxiety,  no  rest  for  my  faith,  no 
satisfaction  for  my  understanding,  till  I  embrace  the  senti- 

1  Theology,  pp.  21-2.  a  Essays,  p.  223. 

'  On  the  Inspiration  of  Scripture. 


214  NOTES. 

ment  that  the  qualities  of  sanctity  and  inspiration  belong 
only  to  the  religious  and  theoretical  element  which  is  diffused 
through  the  Old  Testament ;  and  that  where  this  element  is 
absent — where  there  is  nothing  adapted  to  communicate 
"  doctrine,  reproof,  correction,  or  instruction  in  righteous- 
ness," nothing  fitted  to  "make  the  man  of  God  perfect, 
thoroughly  furnished  unto  every  good  work  " — there  we  are 
not  called  to  acknowledge  any  inspiration,  nor  warranted  to 
assume  it.''^ 

Nine  of  these  extracts  are  made  from  the  '  Defence  of  the 
Kev.  Rowland  Williams,  D.  D.,  in  the  Arches  Court  of  Can- 
terbury, by  James  Fitzjames  Stephen,  M.  A.,  of  the  Inner 
Temple,  Barrister-at-Law,  Recorder  of  ISTewark-on -Trent.' 
The  three  last  are  from  '  The  Text  of  the  Old  Testament 
Considered,'  by  Samuel  Davidson,  D.  D. 


B.     (Chap.  ix.  p.  173.) 
BIBLICAL  IITTERPRETATION. 

A  brief  glance  at  the  history  of  Biblical  interpretation, 
regarded  as  a  science,  will  alone  be  sufficient  to  explain  how 
it  is  that  the  Sacred  Volume  has  come  to  be  regarded  as  in- 
definite in  its  teachings,  and  more  or  less  unintelligible  in  its 
utterances.  Any  dooJc,  treated  as  it  has  been,  must  nec"essarily 
be  stamped  with  that  character. 

The  following  sketch  is  abridged  from  an  article  on  Inter- 
pretation, by  Dr.  Credner,  found  in  Kitto's  Biblical  Cyclo- 
paedia, edited  by  Dr.  W.  L.  Alexander  of  Edinburgh. 

Three  ditferent  modes  of  interpreting  the  Bible  have  at 
different  periods  been  adopted  :  the  GffiAMMATiCAL,  the  Al- 
LEGOEicAL,  and  the  Dogmatical. 

The   grammatical   mode   of  interpretation  simply  investi- 

*  Paper  in  Cong.  Mag.  (Julj,  1837),  quoted  from  Davidson. 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  215 

gates  the  sense  contained  in  the  words  of  the  Bible,  The 
allegorical  maintains  that  the  words  of  Scripture  have, 
besides  their  simple  sense,  another  which  is  concealed  as 
behind  a  picture,  and  endeavours  to  find  out  this  supposed 
figurative  sense.  The  dogmatical  endeavours  to  explain  tlie 
Bible  in  harmony  with  the  dogmas  of  the  Church,  followini"; 
the  principle  of  analogia  Jidei.  The  chief  expedient  adopted 
in  order  to  eflfect  harmony  of  interpretation  has  been  to  con- 
sider certain  articles  of  faith  to  be  Leading  Doctrines,  and 
to  regulate  and  define  accordingly  the  sense  of  the  Bible 
wherever  it  appeared  doubtful  and  uncertain. 

When  the  principle  of  one  general  Catholic  Church  was 
adopted,  it  was  found  difilcult  to  select  doctrines  by  the  appli- 
cation of  which  to  Biblical  interpretation  a  perfect  harmony 
could  be  effected.  Yet  the  wants  of  science  powerfully  de- 
manded a  systematical  arrangement  of  Biblical  doctrines. 
This  sense  of  need  led  first  of  all  to  allegorical  interpretation. 
Origen  argues  thus:  ^The  Holy  Scriptures  inspired  by  God 
form  an  harmonious  whole,  perfect  in  itself,  without  any  de- 
fects and  contradictions,  and  containing  nothing  that  is  insig- 
nificant' and  superfluous.  Grammatical  interpretation  leads  to 
obstacles  and  objections  which  are  inadmissible.  ISTow,  since 
the  merely  grammatical  interpretation  can  neither  remove  nor 
overcome  these  objections,  we  must  seek  for  an  expedient 
beyond  the  boundaries  of  grammatical  interpretation.  The 
allegorical  ofi'ers  this  expedient,  and  consequently  is  above 
the  grammatical.' 

Allegorical  interpretation,  however,  it  soon  appeared,  could 
not  be  reduced  to  settled  rules,  since  it  necessarily  depends 
upon  the  greater  or  less  influence  of  the  imagination  ;  so  in  pro- 
cess of  time  there  gradually  sprung  np  the  dogmatical  mode, 
founded  upon  the  interpretations  of  ecclesiastical  teachers  who 
were  recognised  as  orthodox  in  the  Catholic  Church.  This 
more  and  more  supplanted  the  allegorical,  which  henceforward 
was  left  to  the  wit  and  ingenuity  of  a  few  individuals. 


2  I G  NOTES. 

After  the  commencement  of  tlie  fifth  century,  partly  in  con- 
sequence of  the  full  development  of  the  ecclesiastical  system  of 
doctrines  defined  in  all  their  parts,  and  partly  by  continually 
increasing  ignorance  of  the  languages  in  which  the  Bible  was 
written,  interpretation  was  confined  to  the  mere  collection  of 
explanations  which  had  first  been  given  by  men  whose  ecclesi- 
astical orthodoxy  was  regarded  as  unquestionable. 

During  the  middle  ages,  however,  allegorical  interpretation 
prevailed,  chiefly  because  it  gave  satisfaction  to  sentiment,  and 
afibrded  occupation  to  free  mental  speculation. 

When  in  the  fifteenth  century  classical  studies  revived,  gram- 
matical interpretation,  which,  as  a  rule,  goes  hand  in  hand  with 
progress,  again  rose  to  honour.  It  was  especially  by  this  wea- 
pon that  the  domineering  Catholic  Church  was  combated  at 
the  period  of  the  Reformation ;  but  as  soon  as  the  newly- 
sprung-up  Protestant  Church  had  been  dogmatically  established, 
it  began  to  consider  grammatical  interpretation  a  dangerous 
adversary  of  its  own  dogmas,  and  opposed  it  as  much  as  did 
the  Roman  Catholics  themselves.  Allegorical  interpretation, 
therefore,  in  due  time  reappeared  under  the  form  of  typical 
and  mystical  theology,  as  it  always  does  when  the  dogmatic 
mode  exercises  an  unnatural  pressure. 

Towards  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century  gram- 
matical interpretation  recovered  its  authority,  and,  in  spite  of 
continual  attacks,  towards  the  conclusion  of  that  century  it 
decidedly  prevailed  among  German  Protestants.  During  the 
last  thirty  years,  however,  both  Protestants  and  Roman  Catho- 
lics have  again  curtailed  its  rights  and  invaded  its  province, 
by  promoting  the  opposing  claims  of  dogmatical  and  mystical 
interpretation. 

The  question  really  demanding  a  settlement  is  this :  Whether 
the  rules  and  gifts  which  qualify  a  man  for  the  right  under- 
standing of  ordinary  written  language  are,  or  ^re  not,  sufficient 
for  rightly  understanding  the  Bible?  Most  Biblical  interpreters 
have  declared  such  rules  and  gifts  to  be  insufficient,  because. 


NATIONAL     ESTABLISHMENTS.  217 

say  they,  the  Bible,  having  been  written  under  the  direct 
guidance  of  tlie  Holy  Ghost,  is  not  to  be  measured  by  the 
common  rules  which  are  applicable  only  to  the  lower  sphere 
of  merely  human  thoughts  and  compositions.  The  result  has 
been  that  interpretation  has  become  neither  more  nor  less  than 
the  art  of  understanding  the  Bible  according  to  the  particular 
ecclesiastical  system  that  may  be  in  vogue  at  any  given  period. 

But  surely  it  will  be  allowed  that  if  God  has  deemed  it  de- 
sirable to  reveal  His  Will  to  mankind  by  means  of  intelligible 
books.  He  must  have  intended  that  the  contents  of  those  books 
should  be  discovered  in  accordance  with  tliose  general  laws 
which  are  conducive  to  the  right  understanding  of  documents 
in  general.  For  if  this  were  not  tlie  case,  lie  would  have 
chosen  insufficient  and  even  contradictory  means  inadequate  to 
the  purpose  He  had  in  view,  which  cannot  be  supposed. 

The  interpretation  which,  in  spite  of  all  ecclesiastical  opposi- 
tion, ought  to  be  adopted  as  the  only  true  one,  is  unquestion- 
ably that  which  has  in  modern  times  been  styled  the  Historico- 
Gkammatical.  This  appellation  has  been  chosen  because  the 
epithet  grammatical  seems  to  be  too  narrow  and  too  much 
restricted  to  the  mere  verbal  sense.  It  might  be  more  correct 
to  style  it  simply  the  Histoeical  interpretation,  since  the  word 
historical  comprehends  everything  that  is  requisite  to  be  known 
about  the  language,  the  turn  of  mind,  and  the  individuality  of 
an  author,  so  far  as  this  knowledge  is  needful  in  order  rightly 
to  understand  his  book. 


C.     (Chap.  ix.  p.  182.) 

NATIONAL  ESTABLISHMENTS. 

Those — and  they  are  possibly  but  few  of  the  present  gene- 
ration— who  have  carefully  read  Coleridge's  remarkable  book 
'On  the  Constitution  of  the  Cliurch  and  State  according  to  the 
10 


218  NOTES. 

idea  of  each,'  ^  will  be  aware  that  the  author  attaches,  and  not 
without  reason,  great  importance  to  the  distinction  therein 
drawn  between  the  National  Church  and  the  Church  of  Christ. 

'The  Christian  Church,'  he  says,  'is  a  public  and  visible 
community,  having  ministers  of  its  own,  whom  the  State  can 
neither  constitute  nor  degrade,  and  whose  maintenance  among 
Christians  is  as  secure  as  the  command  of  Christ  can  make  it : 
for  "  so  hath  the  Lord  ordained  that  they  which  preach  the 
Gospel  should  live  of  the  Gospel  "  (1  Cor.  ix.  14).  .  .  .  '  It  (the 
Church  of  Christ)  is  the  opposite  to  the  world  only,  asking  of 
any  particular  State  neither  wages  nor  dignities,  but  demand- 
ing protection,  that  is,  to  be  let  alone.' 

'  The  National  Church  is  a  public  and  visible  community, 
having  ministers  whom  the  nation,  through  the  agency  of  a 
constitution,  hath  created  trustees  of  a  reserved  national  fund, 
upon  fixed  terms  and  with  defined  duties,  and  whom,  in  case  of 
breach  of  these  terms  or  dereliction  of  those  duties,  the  nation, 
through  the  same  agency,  may  discharge.' 

This  distinction,  although  not  formally  drawn,  is  clearly  in- 
volved in  the  conflicting  definitions  given  of  'the  Church'  in 
the  nineteenth  Article  of  the  Anglican  communion,  and  in  the 
work  of  its  great  defender,  '  the  judicious  Hooker.' 

According  to  the  Article  (xix.),  '  The  Church  is  a  congrega- 
tion of  faithful  men.'  According  to  Hooker  it  is  a  mixed  com- 
munity oi  faithful  and  unfaithful^  comprehending  the  worst 
as  well  as  the  best.  'It  is  known,'  he  says,  'by  an  external 
profession  of  Christianity,  without  regard  in  any  respect  had 
to  the  moral  virtues  or  spiritual  graces  of  any  member  of  that 

1  3rd  Ed,  Edited  by  Henry  Nelson  Coleridge,  Esq.  Pickering,  1839.  This 
little  work — '  the  only  work.'  says  the  editor,  '  that  I  know  or  have  ever  heard 
mentioned  that  even  attempts  a  solution  of  the  difficulty  in  which  an  ingenious 
enemy  of  the  Church  of  England  may  easily  involve  most  ot  its  modern  defenders 
— Mr.  Coleridge  prized  highly.  The  saving  distinctions.'  he  said,  'are  plainly 
stated  in  it,  and  I  am  sure  nothing  is  wanted  to  make  them  tell,  but  that  some 
kind  friend  should  steal  them  from  their  obscure  hiding-place,  and  just  tumble 
them  down  before  the  public  as  Ms  otcn.'    (Table  Talk,  p.  5.) 


NATIONAL    ESTABLISHMENTS.  210 

body.  Yea,  althougli  tliey  may  be  iin])ious  idolaters,  wicked 
heretics,  imps  and  limbs  of  Satan,'  The  apparent  contradiction 
arises  from  the  word  '  Church '  being  used  in  totally  different 
senses.  By  'the  Cliurch  '  the  framer  of  the  Article  evidently 
means  the  Ejnscopal  communion.  By  the  same  phrase  Hooker 
as  clearly  understands  the  nation  at  large. 

Why,  then,  should  these  two  distinct  institutions,  the  Epis- 
copal Church  and  the  Church  of  the  nation,  always  be  dealt 
with  as  if  they  were  one  and  identical  ?  Why  should  the  State 
not  be  able  to  exercise  its  right  of  legislating  for  the  Church 
of  the  nation  without  at  the  same  time  interfering  with  the 
Christian  liberty  of  the  congregation  of  the  faithful?  The 
answer  is  obvious :  Simply  because  these  two  having  been  once 
one,  we  continue,  in  defiance  of  facts,  to  act  on  the  theory  that 
the  Episcopal  Church  is  still  the  Church  of  the  nation.  AVe  do 
so  partly,  no  doubt,  from  the  difficulty  of  perceiving  how,  in 
case  of  separation,  the  ministers  of  the  nation  could,  if  they 
wished  it,  be  also  ministers  of  the  Episcopal  communion ; 
partly  from  the  unwillingness  of  the  clerical  body,  in  spite  of 
unfavourable  statistics,  to  consent,  even  for  liberty^  to  be  re- 
garded as  anything  less  than  the  National  Church. 

To  what  extent  these  obstacles  are  capable  of  being  over- 
come it  is  at  present  impossible  to  say ;  but  the  fact  that,  on 
tlie  one  hand,  hostile  seceders,  embracing  at  least  AaZ/"  of  those 
who  attend  public  worship  at  all,  largely  clamour  for  a  change  ; 
that,  on  tlie  other,  demands  hitherto  unknown  are  now  made 
by  multitudes  of  the  Established  Clergy  to  Romanise  the 
National  Church  at  will ;  that  a  growing  sense  of  the  right  of 
every  Christian  communion  to  regulate  its  own  doctrine  and 
discipline  is  pervading  society;  and  yet  that  the  English  peo- 
ple, Protestant  to  the  core,  are  as  much  as  ever  attached  to 
their  ancestral  form  of  worship :  these  things  combined  will 
probably  before  long  compel  the  enquiry  whether  or  no  it  is 
not  possible  so  to  separate  the  Episcopal  Church  from  the 
Church  of  tl^e  nation  (or,  as  it  should  rather  be  expressed, 


220  NOTES. 

from  the  National  Religious  Institute^  for  such  would  not  pro- 
perly speaking  be  a  Church)  that  the  one,  whether  ritualistic 
or  otherwise,  might  enjoy  all  the  liberty  of  a  voluntary  society, 
and  the  other  be  made  acceptable  to  the  multitudes  who  now 
reject  and  despise  it. 

This  is  not  the  place  to  discuss  details.  But  it  may  not  be 
amiss  to  say  that  the  supposed  difficulty  of  accomplishing  such 
a  change  is  probably  exaggerated.  The  basis  on  which  the 
separation  in  question  might  be  effected  is  in  some  particulars 
obvious  enough.  The  Apostles'  Creed,  and  such  portions  of 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  as  are  in  harmony  therewith, 
would  remain  in  use,  while  the  Nicene  and  Athauasian  Creeds, 
the  Offices,  and  the  Communion  Service  would  be  appropriated 
by  the  Episcopal  Church.  Baptisms,  marriages,  and  funerals, 
as  more  or  less  civil  acts,  might  continue  to  be  performed  with 
suitable  offices  by  the  national  clerisy,  those  who  were  dissatis- 
fied with  what  they  would  regard  as  'maimed  rites'  supple- 
menting them  by  such  additional  services  as  they  might  deem 
necessary.  The  recognition  of  Dissenting  baptisms,  the  pre- 
sence of  the  Registrar  in  a  Nonconformist  place  of  worship  in 
order  to  legalise  a  marriage,  and  quarrels  about  the  right  of 
sepulture  in  parochial  churchyards  would  then  all  be  rendered 
needless.  That  which  is  national  would  be  treated  nationally, 
while  that  which  properly  belongs  to  Churches  would  be  left 
untouched  by  the  State. 

Parochial  edifices  would  of  course  remain  as  public  property 
in  the  hands  of  the  respective  parishes  to  which  they  already 
belong.  The  chapels-of-ease,  the  district  churches,  and  all 
private  endowments  would  properly  fall  into  the  hands  of  the 
Episcopal  Church.  Parochial  organisation  would  be  un- 
touched. In  every  parish  throughout  the  kingdom  there 
would  still  remain  the  'germ  of  civilisation,'  and  in  the  're- 
motest villages  a  nucleus  round  which  the  capabilities  of  the 
place  might  crystallise  and  brighten.' 

It  is   of  course  easy  to   multiply  objections  to  any  such 


NATIONAIi    ESTABLISHMENTS.  221 

scheme,  and  especially  on  the  ground  that  it  would  practically 
be  found  impossible  so  to  recast  the  National  Church  as  to 
make  either  its  teaching  or  its  offices  acceptable  to  everybody. 
But  this  need  not  be  attempted.  The  reconstruction  would 
of  course  proceed  on  recognised  facts,  such  as  that  England 
is  a  Protestant  nation ;  that  her  laws  and  institutions  are  all 
based  on  Christianity  as  revealed  in  the  Bible ;  that,  as  a  fact, 
all  but  a  very  small  number  indeed  of  those  who  care  about 
religion  at  all  agree  in  great  leading  principles  and  doctrines. 

That  under  any  arrangement  some  clergymen  would,  as 
now,  attach  more  importance  to  one  class  of  religious  thought 
than  another ;  that  some  would  be  Broad  and  others  Evangel- 
ical ;  that  there  would  still  be  room  for  forbearance  with  one 
another  can  scarcely  be  doubted ;  but  essentially  no  difficulties 
would  arise  at  all  corresponding  in  importance  to  those  which 
now  trouble  us.  We  should  at  least  be  delivered  from  the 
inconsistency  of  attempting  by  Parliamentary  authority  to 
change  or  to  modify  the  formularies  of  a  Church  which,  if 
a  Church  at  all,  may  well  resist  all  pressure  on  the  part  of  the 
State  to  force  its  doctrine.  Tlie  appointment  of  a  clergyman, 
whether  vested  as  now  in  patrons  or  given  to  the  parish,  might 
easily  be  ordered,  aud  his  removal,  if  needful,  would  be  under 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  courts  of  law. 

Perhaps  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  if  the  distinction  here 
urged  had  originally  been  recognised,  the  long  struggle  of 
Puritanism  for  liberty  of  conscience  would  have  been  rendered 
needless,  and  Dissent  at  the  present  day  might  have  been  un- 
known. Supplementary  fellowships  of  a  voluntary  character 
would  have  supplied  all  deficiencies,  and  the  Church,  instead 
of  being  the  deadly  antagonist  of  a  multitude  of  sects,  would 
have  been  the  fruitful  mother  of  as  many  independent  com- 
munities as  the  nekcessities  of  the  case,  whether  arising  from 
spiritual  needs  or  from  changes  of  opinion,  might  in  course  of 
time  have  required. 

The  error  of  the  Reformers,  or  rather  of  those  who  yielded 


222  ifOTES. 

to  their  influence,  was  that  they  failed  to  see,  or  seeing  disre- 
garded, the  fact  that  the  great  ecclesiastical  system  from  which 
they  had  broken  off  was  at  once  a  polity  and  a  religion ;  that 
if  in  one  aspect  it  was  a  power  having  its  centre  at  Rome,  in 
another  it  was  a  conviction  having  its  root  in  the  individual 
conscience.  Had  they  regarded  this  aright  they  would,  as 
statesmen,  have  dealt  with  Romanism  somewhat  differently. 
Religion,  as  such,  under  whatever  form,  would  have  been  let 
alone.  It  would  then  have  been  perceived  that  Protestantism, 
from  its  very  nature,  must  necessarily  increase  individuality 
of  helief-^  and  suitable  provision  having  been  made  for  the 
development  of  this  inevitable  tendency,  by  absolute  freedom 
being  secured  to  each  and  all  to  supplement  what  they  felt  to  be 
wanting  by  voluntary  action,  an  institution  would  have  sprung 
into  existence  which  would  have  proved,  far  more  than  any 
national  Church  ever  has  or  can  do,  a  true  bond  of  unity ;  at 
once  loyal  to  the  monarch  and  acceptable  to  the  people. 

This  result  would  have  followed,  simply  because  a  provision 
for  social  worship  and  public  teaching,  the  want  of  men  in 
general,  would  in  that  case  have  been  fully  met.  God  would 
have  been  recognised  nationally  without  individual  consciences 
being  interfered  with  ;  and  everything  pertaining  to  the  pecu- 
liar religious  convictions  of  each  separate  person — to  his  per- 
sonal relations  to  God  and  duty,  would  have  been  left  to  be 
met  by  that  voluntary  provision  which  men  are  always  wil- 
ling to  make  when  the  religious  instinct  has  been  thoroughly 
awakened,  and  earnestness  has  taken  the  place  of  indifference. 
Need  it  be  observed  that  to  a  national  clerisy  chosen  and 
controlled  as  these  would  be,  separated  from  any  particular 
Church,  and  therefore  without  a  motive  to  proselytism,  the 
superintendence  of  the  education  of  the  nation  might  well  be 
entrusted. 

To  speak  of  embracing  TVesleyans  and  other  seceders  in  the 
Church  of  England,  by  absorbing  them,  after  they  have  built 
so  many  thousands  of  places  of  worship,  and  when,  by  means 


NATIONAL    ESTABLISHMENTS.  223 

thereof,  they  can  secure  good  incomes  for  their  ministers,  is 
the  most  idle  of  dreams.  A  Protestant  Church  in  a  free 
country  like  our  own  can  never  successfully  imitate  the  Church 
of  Rome  by  uniting  to  herself  different  orders  under  control  of 
any  kind.  But  she  can  do  what  is  far  better.  She  can  take 
undei  her  wing  all  forms  of  devout  thouglit.  She  can  win 
tliem  to  herself  by  the  love  of  a  large  heart,  and  by  the  willing 
recognition,  nay  the  honouring,  of  an  individuality  which  is 
the  offspring  of  freedom,  the  proof  of  earnestness,  and  the  sta- 
bility of  all  that  is  true  and  good. 

The  great  error  of  the  Church  of  England,  regarded  as  a 
national  establishment,  has  been  that  she  has  never  had  faith 
in  herself;  she  has  never  had  strength  to  believe  in  anything 
better  than  mere  outioard  conformity  or  professed  unity  of 
o])inion.  But  it  cannot  be  the  true  policy  of  any  national 
Church  thus  to  necessitate  if  not  to  promote  secession.  On 
the  contrary,  her  voice  should  always  be,  'Obey  conscience, 
follow  truth,  but,  if  possible,  abide  with  your  brethren.  We 
may  not  be  one  in  all  points,  but  we  can  at  least  unite  in  com- 
mon prayer  and  praise,  and  in  a  common  recognition  of  the 
Giver  of  every  good  and  perfect  gift.' 

England  swarms  with  Dissenters  only  because  the  Church 
of  England  has  never  allowed  any  safety-valve  for  Christian 
zeal  or  individual  convictions.  She  may  yet  make  herself 
the  Church  of  the  nation  if  she  will,  but  it  must  be  by  sepa- 
rating herself  as  an  establishment  alike  from  the  Episcopal 
and  from  every  other  Church.  How  long  that  opportunity 
may  last  none  can  say.  In  Ireland  the  time  for  so  doing  has 
perhaps  already  past.  Nothing  in  all  probability  will  satisfy 
a  people  whose  public  sentiment  is  formed  by  a  priesthood 
ever  panting  after  pre-eminence,  hwt  2)Ossession  of  the  revenues 
of  the  Church,  or,  if  this  cannot  be  had,  their  secularisation. 
Yet  who  does  not  feel  that,  if  it  were  jjossible  to  devote  these 
funds  to  any  religious  service  which  could  be  accepted,  as  far 
as  it  went,  by  Romanists  as  well   as  Protestants,  how  mucli 


22  k  NOTES. 

better  such  a  disposal  of  them  would  be  thaa  to  employ  them 
ia  endowing  rival  Churches  or  in  any  work  of  a  merely  secular 
character. 

Those  who  may  be  disposed  to  meet  these  observations  with 
sarcasm  or  scorn,  may  well  be  reminded  that  the  root-tliougJit 
on  which  they  have  proceeded  belongs  to  a  man  who  is  uni- 
versally admitted  to  have  been  one  of  the  deepest  thinkers  of 
his  age ;  a  man  who  was  Conservative  in  his  politics,  and  more 
than  usually  attached  to  the  Episcopal  Church.  Nor  should 
the  hints  he  has  offered  be  regarded  as  unworthy  of  considera- 
tion because  intended  to  be  worked  out  by  others  whenever  a 
time  should  arrive  in  which  they  would  be  listened  to. 


D.  (Chap.  X.  p.  195.) 
CHURCH  AUTHORITY. 

The  position  and  claim  of  the  Church  as  a  great  teacher,  and 
as  a  guide  to  truth,  cannot  be  separated  from  any  fair  enquiry 
into  the  place  which  Scripture  ought  to  occupy  in  the  formation 
of  our  beliefs.  The  existence  or  non-existence  of  an  institu- 
tion claiming  the  right  sometimes  of  deciding  what  is  truth, 
and  sometimes  of  supplementing  that  truth  by  tradition,  can- 
not but  be  an  important  element  in  all  investiir;/"  'ns  bearing 
upon  the  Bible. 

Nor  is  the  point  at  issue,  as  is  generally  supposed,  merely 
one  of  degree.  The  thing  needing  to  be  established  is,  not  to 
what  extent  any  existing  ecclesiastical  body  may  or  may  not 
have  authority  in  controversies  of  faith ;  nor  yet,  whether  or 
no,  any  actual  Church  holds  in  its  own  bosom  a  deposit  of 
apostolic  tradition  ;  but  whether  any  such  body,  having  Divine 
authority  for  its  institution,  exists  in  the  world.  'For  if  it  does, 
nothing  can  be  more  obvious  than  that  to  its  decisions,  so  far 
as  it  is  empowered  to  give  them,  it  becomes  all  of  us  to  bow. 


CHURCH   AUTHORITY.  225 

Hitherto  this  great  question  has  heen  treated  rather  with 
reference  to  the  extent  of  power  clairaed  by  any  given  Church, 
than  to  the  reality  or  non-reahty  of  the  existence  of  such  an 
organisation  by  Divine  appointment.  That  authority  of  some 
hind  or  other  over  opinions,  as  well  as  over  conduct,  is  vested 
in  all  Churches,  however  small  or  sectarian  they  may  be, 
seems  everywhere  to  be  taken  for  granted. 

Of  course,  so  long  as  it  is  understood  that  this  claim  merely 
implies  that,  like  secular  associations,  religious  bodies  may 
justly  fix  the  conditions  on  which  any  person  shall  be  received 
into,  or  retained  in,  their  fellowship,  no  one  has  a  right  to  dis- 
pute its  propriety.  But  more  than  this  is  commonly  meant ; 
since  all  alike  imagine  they  have  the  Divine  sanction  for  what 
they  do,  and  act  accordingly.  Leaders  of  sects  may  not  indeed 
ask  to  be  regarded  as  successors  of  the  apostles ;  they  may,  on 
the  contrary,  energetically  disclaim  all  such  assumptions ;  and 
yet  they  both  may  and  do  not  unfrequently  exercise  the  power 
such  a  succession  is  supposed  to  confer,  with  far  more  strin- 
gency than  those  who  put  forward  higher  pretensions. 

The  question  needing  to  be  settled  is,  whether  or  no  Christ 
and  His  apostles  ever  appointed  successors,  or  ever  gifted  any 
man  or  body  of  men  with  power  or  ability  to  decide  for  others 
what  ought  or  ought  not  to  be  believed. 

Put  in  this  way,  the  enquiry  primarily,  if  not  exclusively, 
bears  upon  such  ecclesiastical  bodies  as  have  formally  demanded 
the  recognition  of  their  right  to  settle  controversies,  by  virtue 
of  a  commission  received  from  Christ. 

The  reasoning  by  which  this  claim  has  hitherto  been  sus- 
tained cannot  but  be  regarded  as  in  man  yrespects  very  unsatis- 
factory. It  is  argued,  that  inasmuch  as  probably  a  quarter  of 
a  century  must  have  passed  away  before  any  Gospel  or  Epistle 
was  produced  ;  that  as  those  who  at  length  did  write  tell  us 
for  the  most  part  that  they  were  moved  to  do  so  by  passing 
circumstances ;  that  as  they  had  evidently  no  thought  of  leav- 
ing behind  them  any  full  confession  of  faith ;  that  since  they 
10* 


220  NOTES. 

did  not  affirm  in  detail  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  or  expound 
other  mysteries ;  and  since  there  is  no  trace  of  a  collection  of 
apostolical  writings,  or  of  the  formation  of  a  New  Testament 
canon  by  John  or  any  other  influential  Christian  of  the  apos- 
tolic age,  it  could  never  be  intended  that  men  should  take  the 
Scriptures  alone  as  their  rule  of  faith,  or  that  they  should  seek 
in  them  exclusively  for  a  knowledge  of  God's  revelation. 

This  view  is  supposed  to  find  confirmation  in  the  fact  that 
Paul  bids  Timothy  commit  to  faithful  men  what  he  had  '  heard'' 
from  apostolic  lips,  that  they  might  teach  others  also,  and  that 
he  commands  both  the  Corinthians  and  the  Thessalonians  to 
hold  fast  '  the  traditions '  they  had  been  taught.  These  un- 
written teachings,  therefore,  as  handed  down  by  the  Church 
are,  it  is  asserted,  essential  to  the  securing  of  Christian  doc- 
trine in  all  its  fulness,  pure  and  certain  through  all  generations. 

Further,  it  is  argued,  that  as  Christianity  was  but  an  out- 
growth of  Judaism,  the  ancient  priesthood  had  to  be  replaced 
by  the. spiritual  succession  of  duly-appointed  instructors,  and 
that  as  the  first  Christians  had  received  apostolic  teaching 
not  as  the  word  of  man,  but  as  the  Word  of  God,  a  provision 
was  needed  for  securing  to  after-times  a  like  repose  in  author- » 
ity  by  the  appointment  of  a  living,  ever-speaking  tribunal  open 
and  accessible  to  all. 

Whether  such  authority  is  supposed  to  centre  in  an  indivi- 
dual, as  the  Pope,  or  in  a  body  like  the  Church,  matters  little. 
The  Romanist  of  course  holds  to  the  former ;  and  in  so  doing 
maintains  that  the  first  deposit  of  doctrine  was  intended  to 
have  an  organic  growth,  and  to  expand  from  its  roots  by  a  law 
of  inward  necessity,  and  in  a  manner  corresponding  to  the  in- 
tellectual needs  of  believers  in  different  ages.  There  was  to 
be,  he  says,  a  constant  building  up  of  doctrine  as  a  progressive 
development,  a  mapping  out  of  its  details,  and  an  exhibition  of 
its  full  contents,  secured  and  fixed  by  ecclesiastical  decision, 
and  all  was  to  be  accomplished  under  the  guidance  of  the 
Paraclete,  the  teacher  given  to  the  Church. 


CHURCH    AUTnOKITT.  227 

It  is  not  needful  to  enquire  liovv  much  of  this  is  held  only 
by  Romanists,  how  ranch  belongs  to  Anglicanism,  or  how 
much  is  involved  in  the  action  of  every  Nonconforming  com- 
munity. What  we  want  to  know  is,  whether  the  root-idea 
has,  or  has  not,  any  good  foundation  ;  whether  there  is  really 
any  reason  to  believe  that  the  provision  spoken  of  was  ever 
made.  Tlie  words  of  St.  Paul,  whether  to  Timothy  or  to  the 
Gentile  churches,  prove  nothing,  unless  it  can  be  shown  that 
the  traditions  he  refers  to  were  distinct  from,  or  additional  to, 
what  is  now  embodied  in  the  Gospels  and  the  Epistles.  The 
entire  question  is  one  of  fact,  one  therefore  respecting  which 
we  can  know  nothing,  beyond  what  is  left  on  record  in  Scrip- 
ture. 

Now,  there  we  find  no  trace  of  any  teaching  similar  in 
character  to  that  which  is  supposed  to  be  so  essential.  The 
apostles  do  not  merely  tell  people  what  they  ought  to  believe, 
as  if  that  were  enough ;  they  do  not  even  ask  that  anything 
should  be  received,  simply  on  their  responsibility  or  authority. 
St.  Paul  utterly  disclaims  any  wish  to  have  dominion  over  the 
faith  of  his  converts.  '  By  faith  '  he  says,  '  ye  stand.'  '  We 
are  but  helpers  of  your  joy.'  To  the  Corinthians  he  writes, 
'I  speak  as  unto  wise  men,  judge  ye  what  I  say.'  The  Gala- 
tians  he  warns  not  only  against  men  who  might  preach  an- 
other Gospel,  but  against  himself  if  he  should  ever  be  led  to 
do  so.  St.  Peter  exhorts  elders  '  as  also  an  elder.'  St.  John 
directly  appeals  to  his  hearers  as  able  to  distinguish  between 
truth  and  falsehood.  All  the  apostles,  in  short,  seem  to  have 
regarded  themselves  chiefly  as  witnesses  of  facts.  When  a 
new  one  had  to  be  chosen  in  place  of  Judas,  the  reason  given 
is,  that  he  might  be  a  witness  with  the  rest  of  the  resurrec- 
tion. Everything  they  teach,  is  presented  in  the  simplest  form 
possible.  Nothing  can  be  found  at  all  corresponding  to  the 
scholastic  definitions  of  later  times;  nothing  tending  to  indi- 
cate that  such  definitions  would  ever  be  desirable. 

The  evangelical  narrative,  as  we  have  it,  leaves  quite  a  con- 


228  NOTES. 

trary  impression  to  that  wliicli  assumes  the  formal  appoint- 
ment of  a  body  of  men  as  in  any  way  inheritors  of  apostolic 
powers  or  apostolic  wisdom.  The  few  believers  are  gathered 
together  in  fellowships  of  the  simplest  character,  that  as 
'sheep  among  wolves,' they  may  exhort  and  strengthen  one 
another.  Elders  chosen  from  their  midst  are  appointed  over 
them,  and  endowed  with  gifts  fitting  them,  in  the  absence  of 
written  documents,  rightly  to  teach  and  govern  these  infant 
communities.  They  '  break  bread '  together  in  memory  of 
their  Lord,  apparently  without  the  intervention  of  any  officer 
of  the  Church.  ,  They  possess,  but  they  have  no  power  of 
communicating  gifts,  either  of  speech  or  healing.  Even  Philip, 
the  signally-honoured  evangelist,  cannot  confer  any  of  these 
endowments  on  his  converts.  Everything  indicates  that  with 
the  last  man  on  whom  the  last  of  the  apostles  laid  hands  all 
miraculous  power  in  the  Church  ceased  and  determined,  and 
with  that  power  all  apostolic  authority.  Henceforward,  true 
Christians  appear  to  be  essentially  on  a  level,  alike  members  of 
that  royal  priesthood  of  which  Christ  was  the  great  Head  and 
High  Priest,  although  differing  in  talent  and  in  work.  Not 
from  Scripture,  certainly,  can  it  be  shown  that  Christ  or  His 
apostles  ever  framed  an  organization  in  any  respects  corre- 
sponding to  what  we  call  The  Chuech. 

How,  then,  came  such  an  institution  into  existence?  For 
nothing  can  be  plainer  than  that  about  a  hundred  years  after 
the  death  of  John  it  appears^  although  in  anything  but  apos- 
tolic garb.  All  is  altered.  'No  other  change,'  says  Dean 
Stanley,  'equally  momentous  has  ever  since  afl:ected  its  for- 
tunes; yet  none  has  ever  been  so  silent  and  secret.  The 
Church  has  now  become  history,  the  history  not  of  an  isolated 
community  or  of  isolated  individuals,  but  of  an  organized 
society,  incorporated  with  the  political  systems  of  the  world.' 

Was  this  change,  then,  healthy  development — the  fore- 
intended  growth  of  the  acorn  into  the  oak  ?  or  was  it  corrup- 
tion— the  first  signal  indication  of  that  new  order  of  things 


CHURCH   AUTHORITY.  229 

which  then  so  mysteriously  manifested  itself,  at  once  as  an  evil 
and  a  good :  good  in  so  far  as  it  reared  saints  and  subdued 
Paganism  in  the  Roman  empire ;  evil  in  its  later  developments 
culminating  in  the  Papacy?  A  satisfactory  answer  to  this 
question  would  solve  many  difficulties. 

Hard  is  it  to  believe  that  a  Church  which  produced  so  many 
CJiristian  heroes,  so  many  great  and  good  men,  should,  in  any 
sense  whatever,  be  worthily  called  a  'Mystery  of  Iniquity.' 
Harder  still,  however,  is  it  to  imagine,  on  a  review  of  the 
superstitions  encouraged  and  the  persecutions  carried  on  for 
ages  by  its  ecclesiastical  tribunals,  literally  drunk  with  the 
blood  of  the  saints;  its  Christianity  so  dead  and  morally 
degraded  that  nothing  but  the  inroads  of  an  impostor  like 
Mahomet  could  cleanse  the  plains  of  Asia  of  the  impurities  it 
had  nurtured  there;  its  only  religion,  a  religion  of  sacraments, 
under  the  guise  of  which  the  pastors  of  the  Chui^h  had,  as 
Coleridge  puts  it,  '  gradually  changed  the  life  and  light  of  the 
Gospel  into  the  very  superstitions  they  were  commissioned  to 
disperse,  and  thus  y^ag^a/iisefZ  Christianity  in  order  to  christen 
paganism.'  Hard  is  it  to  see  in  such  a  Church  anything  but  a 
profound  mystery  of  God,  a  mystery  of  spiritual  evil,  a  mystery 
of  iniquity.  Be  this,  however,  as  it  may,  nothing  can  certainly 
be  deduced  either  from  its  past  or  its  present  existence,  or 
from  the  past  or  present  history  of  any  of  the  Reformed 
Churches,  which  can  for  a  moment  sustain  the  assertion  that 
God  has  committed  the  development  of  doctrine  or  the  power 
of  decision  in  cases  of  doubt  to  any  body  of  men,  however 
earnest  or  good  they  may  be,  or  however  much  they  may  have 
accomplished  in  the  spread  of  the  Gospel,  in  the  civilisation  of 
nations,  or  in  the  regions  of  benevolent  activity. 


230  2fOTP:s. 


E.  (Chap.  X.  p.  196.) 

IDOLATRY   OF   THE   BIBLE. 

'  Idolatry  of  the  written  Word  expresseth  itself  in  the  holy 
— but  I  call  it  unholy — nf)tion,  which  they  have  taken  up  coib- 
cerning  inspiration,  that  the  very  words  are  inspired,  and  the 
writers  were  but  organs  of  voice  for  that  Word.  .  .  .  And 
in  the  same  spirit  they  require  of  you  at  once  to  believe  the 
Book  as  the  Word  of  God,  by  one  act  of  faith  to  adopt  it,  then 
to  read  it  and  bow  down  before  what  you  read.  That  is  to 
make  the  Book  an  idol,  and  then  prostrate  your  soul  unto  it. 
And  by  so  doing,  you  shall  make  your  soul  a  timorous  creature 
of  superstition,  or  a  blind  worshipper  of  sounds  and  sentences ; 
but  never  a  child  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  Such  notions  flow  not 
from  orthodox  doctrine  which  saith  unto  every  man,  Read  this 
Word  with  what  persuasion  of  its  Divine  authority  you  pres- 
ently have,  and  affect  not  more  than  you  really  have,  for  that 
is  falsehood  or  superstition,  which  God  abhorreth.  Bring  to  it 
the  faculties  of  mind  which  you  presently  have,  and  peruse  it 
with  the  desire  to  be  enlightened  in  the  deep  things  which  it 
containeth,  and  the  Spirit  will  open  your  soul  to  understand 
it  more  and. -more,  and  dispose  your  heart  to  receive  it  more 
and  more,  and  constrain  your  will  to  obey  it  more  and  more ; 
and  as  your  soul  grows  into  its  confirmation  more  and  more, 
you  will  believe  it  more  and  more,  and  your  faith  in  its  inspi- 
ration will  grow  with  your  spiritual  growth  and  strengthen 
with  your  spiritual  strength.' — The  Idolatry  of  the  Bible,  by 
the  Rev.  Edward  Irving. 

From  an  article  on  the  Theology  of  Luther,  by  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Dorner,  Contemporary  Review,  No.  xii. 

(1.)  '  Holy  Scripture,  in  its  real  message  and  purport,  receives 
its  full  credentials  to  the  heart,  by  the  illumination  of  the  Spirit 


IDOLATKY    OF    JIIK    lilBLE.  231 

kindling  in  lis  a  Divine  assurance  of  the  trutli  of  tliis  messaj^e 
— an  assurance  infinitely  superior  to  any  mere  reliance  on  the 
canon  of  the  Church,  and  on  the  correctness  of  the  Ciiurch's 
judgment  with  regard  to  Scripture.' 

(2.)  'Scripture  can  only  be  understood  by  a  kindred  mind 
and  spirit.  That  whicii  is  necessary  to  salvation  is  intelligible 
to  all  who  are  spiritually  disposed,  and  inecjualities  in  mental 
culture  and  philological  skill  are,  in  everything  material,  com- 
pensated by  i\w.  2'>er8picuitij  of  the  Scripture.  The  believer  is 
the  instrument  which  Scripture  creates  for  itself  by  means  of 
which  to  interpret  itself.' 

(3.)  'The  expounder  is  not  to  expound  Scripture  after  the 
standard  o^  any  human  conception  of  its  doctrine,  be  that 
standard  the  Apostles'  Creed,  the  regula  or  analogia  fidei^  or 
the  teaching  of  the  Church.  lie  who  asserts  such  standard  to 
be  necessary,  denies  the  perspicuity  of  Scripture.  The  only 
analogy  for  exposition  is  the  principle  that  one  scripture  can- 
not contradict  another.' 

(4.)  'Luther  makes  no  difficulty  in  allowing,  tha't  in  exter- 
nals, not  only  Stephen,  but  the  sacred  writers  themselves  have 
fallen  into  inaccuracies.  The  worth  of  the  Old  Testament  is 
not  diminished  in  his  eyes  by  the  concession  that  several  of  its 
pieces  have  been  worked  up  by  various  liands.  \yhat  matters 
it,  he  asks,  with  reference  to  the  Pentateuch,  if  Moses  did  not 
write  it?' 

(5.)  'Luther  recognises  in  Scripture  not  merely  something 
Divine,  but  something  human.  The  German  Reformer  unques- 
tionably draws  a  distinction  between  the  word  of  God  and  the 
Holy  Scripture,  not  merely  in  the  form,  but  also  in  thev  purport 
of  the  message.' 

(6.)  Luther  '  awards  to  faith  a  right  of  judging  the  canon  on 
grounds  not  arbitrary,  but  objective  and  dogmatic ;  and  quite 
distinct  from  any  investigations  of  the  genuineness  and  antiquity 
of  its  parts.  .  .  .  The  right  of  faith  to  judge  and  criticise 
Scripture  is,  however,  a  negative  right,  reducing  itself  to  the 


232  NOTES. 

denial  of  canonical  authority,  to  all  that  would  contradict  faith. 
And  as  faith  must  agree  with  Scripture,  tliis  judgment  of  Scrip- 
ture hy  faith  reduces  itself  ultimately  to  a  judgment  of  Scrip- 
ture hy  itself  To  the  power  of  interpreting  itself,  which  he 
ascribes  to  Scripture,  corresponds  in  his  system  the  power  of 

Scripture  to  decide  what  is  really  Scripture The 

process  of  combining  faith  with  the  word  of  God  must  be  con- 
tinuous; we  must  be  always  reconciling  Scripture  and  the 
Christian  consciousness,  in  order  to  obtain  that  full  and  un- 
doubting  certainty  which  consists  in  t=he  union  of  the  personal 
and  subjective  witli  the  objective  word  of  God  in  Scripture. 
Thus,  the  certainty  and  joy  of  faith  is  not  suspended  for 
Luther  by  allowing  criticism  all  its  rights ;  nor,  on  the  other 
hand,  does  Scripture  lose  in  value  and  authority  by  the  empha- 
sis he  lays  on  faith,  but  rather  gains  in  these  respects,  inas- 
much as  Scripture  becomes  an  internal  authority  with  which 
faith  cannot  dispense. 


THE    END. 


NEW  AND  POPULAR  BOOKS 


JUST   PUBLISHED   BT 


654  BROADWAY,  NEW  YORK. 


NE¥  WORK  BY  IK  MARVEL 

RURAL    STUDIES. 

WITH    PRACTICAL     HINTS     FOR     COUNTRY    PLACES, 

BY    IK    MARVEL. 

ILLUSTRATED  BY  THE  AUTHOR. 
In  I  voL  i2mo.,  uniform  with  "  My  Farm  of  Edgewood."    $i  75. 

As  the  title  implies,  the  book  contains  a  body  of  hints  foi 
those  living  in  the  country,  and  for  those  who  thinlc  of  living 
there. 

The  author  has  sought,  by  the  introduction  of  his  friends 
Lackland  and  Urban,  to  demonstrate — 

1st.    fVh)i  a  man  should  go^  if  at  all^  into  the  country. 

2d.   What  sort  of  a  homestead  he  should  seek  there. 

Jd.    What  he  should  do  when  in  possession  of  it. 

IK  MARVEL'S  WORKS-7  Vols.,  yiz., 

I.  REVERIES  OF  A  BACHELOR.      I  voL  izmo $1  75 

"                "                "      Cabinet  Ed.,  1  vol.  i6mo.  i  7J 

II.  DREAM  LIFE,     i  vol.  izmo 175 

"                 "         Cabinet  Edition,  I  vol.  i6mo 175 

III.  MY  FARM  OF   EDGEWOOD.     i  vol.  i2mo I  75 

IV.  WET  DAYS  OF  EDGEWOOD.       "         "     .    I  75 

V.  SEVEN  STORIES.     I  vol.  izmo 175 

VI,  DOCTOR  JOHN  S.     2  vols.  l2mo 350 

Copies  sent  hy  mail,  postage  paid,  on  receljJt  of  price. 


1.  New  Volume  of  Lange's  Commen- 
tary on  the  Epistles  of  James,  Peter,  John,  and  Jude.  i  vol.  8vo. 

2.  Liber  Librorum. 

Uniform  with  "£cc«  Deus''  a:d  ^'■Ecce  Homo."     I  vol.  l6mo. 
$1  50 

TRENCS'S  NEW   WO  UK. 

3.  Studies  in  the  Gospels. 

By  Rt.  Rev.  R.  C.  Trench,     i  vol.  8vo.     $j. 

4.  The    Public    Debt   of   the   United 

STATES.  By  J.  S.  GiBBO.vs.  I  vol.  crown  8vo.  Pr  cc  $2. 
The  object  of  this  volume  is  to  clear  away  the  obscuritv  that 
hangs  over  the  public  debt,  and  to  make  it  intelligible  to  the 
people.  It  describes  the  different  kinds  of  Government  securities, 
explains  the  nature  of  the  debt,  the  bearings  of  taxation,  and 
the  rights  as  well  as  the  duties  of  the  tax-payers.  It  shows  how 
the  taxes  may  be  reduced  and  the  debt  gradually  paid  at  the 
same  time.  It  explains,  also,  the  use  of  currency,  and  endeavors 
to  prove  that  there  are  natural  and  scientific  principles  and  laws 
which  govern  all  the  relations  of  labor,  industry,  trade,  and  com- 
merce, on  which  our  financial  system,  to  be  permanent  and  useful, 
must  be  founded  and  administered. 

5.  Life  of  Carl  Ritter. 

By  Rev.  W.  L.  Gage,     i  vol.  iimo.     $1  75. 

MEV.  nn.  SSEDD'S  NEW  WORK. 

6.  A  Treatise  on  Homiletics  and  Pas- 

TORAL  THEOLOGY.     By  William  G.  T.  Shedd,  D.  D., 
of  the  New  York  Union  Theological  Seminary,  and  author 
of  the  "  History  of  Christian    Doctrine."     One  vol.  8vo., 
tinted  paper,  450  pages.     $3   50. 
The  work  attempts  to  exhibit  the  fundamental  principles  in- 
volved in  Preaching  and  Pastoral  Duty,  and  at  the  same  time  to 
meet  the  practical  wants  of  the  clerical  profession.     The  Pub- 
l:shers  expect  that  it  will  prove  to  be  a  useful  text-book  for  those 
who  are  preparing  for  the  sacred  ministry  ;  and  also  a  work  of 
interest    and    profit    to  those  who  are  already  in  the  profession. 
MANY  OF   THE   TOPICS    DIiCUSSED    AND    TRAINS  OF 
REFLECTION    WILL    HAVE    VALUE    FOR    THE  LEGAL 
PROFESSION,      AND      FOR      GENERAL      READERS      IN 
HIGHER   RANGES  OF  LITERATURE. 

The  work  is  printed  in  the  same  style  and  form  as  Dr.  Shedd's 
History  of  Christian  Doctrine,  which  has  met  with  such  a  favora- 
ble reception  from  the  theological  public. 

Also,  New  Edition  of  HISTORY  OF  CHRISTIAN  DOC- 
TRINE, by  same  author  2  vols.  8vo.  Tinted  paper.  Fifth 
Edition.  $6  50. 

Copies  sent  by  mail,  postage  paid,  on  receipt  ofpnce. 


7.  Literary  Life  of  James  K.  Paulding. 

Compiled  by  his  Son,  Wm.  J.  Paulding. 
Comprises  the  career  of  this  author  for  sixty  years,  during  what 
may  be  called  the  formative  period  of  American  literature;  por- 
tions of  his  correspondence  with  Washington  Irving  and  others, 
bearing  for  the  most  part  on  literary  concerns — extracts  from 
works  now  out  of  print — and  some  matter  never  before  published. 
I  vol,  crown  8vo.     Fine  Portrait.    $z  50 

TWO  NEW  VOLUMES  (9  nt,d  10)  OF 

8.  Froude's  History  of  England, 

From  the  Fall  of  Wolset  to  the  Death  of  Elizabeth. 
By  James  Frotjde,  M.  A.,  of  Exeter  College,  From  the 
Fifth  London  edition.  In  10  crown  8vo.  vols.,  $j  each  ;  01 
half  calf,  $5  each. 

The  "  British  Quarterly  Review"  for  January,  1867,  says: — 
"■  They  are  a  worthy  continuation  of  a  history  which  will  hold 
a  high  place  in  English  literature.  Mr.  Froude  belongs  to  the 
school  of  Carlyle,  but  he  is  not  an  imitator  of  th  .t  great  writer. 
He  equals  him  in  industry  and  profound  study,  but  he  is  calmer 
and  more  natural  in  hid  tone,  more  thoughtful  in  his  remarks  on 
events,  more  unaffected  in  his  narrative,  and  more  simple  and 
lifelike  in  his  portraits.  In  the  main,  he  is  a  pictorial  historian, 
and  his  skill  in  descrif>tion  and  fulness  of  knowledge  make  his  work 
abound  in  scenes  and  passages  that  are  almost  new  to  the  general 
reader. 

9.  Studies  in  English  ; 

OR,    Glimpses  of    the    Inner  Life    of    our   Language. 
By  M.  Schkle  de  Vere,  LL,D.,  Professor  of  Modern  Lan- 
guages in  the  University  of  Virginia,     i   vol.   crown  8vo., 
tinted  paper.     Price  $2  50, 
The  New  York  "  Tribune"  says  :— 

"His  book,  though  showing  the  fruits  of  various  erudition,  is 
not  intended  exclusively  for  scholars  ;  it  may  be  read  to  advantage 
by  all  who  have  any  respect  for  sense  or  conscience  in  the  use  of 
words,  and  who  believe  that  justness  of  thought  is  closely  con- 
nected with  propriety  of  expression." 

Tiro  NEW  VOLUMES  (2  and  3)  OF 

(0.  History  of  the  Christian  Church, 

From  Constantine  the  Great  to  Gregory  the  Great. 
A.  D,  jxi-600.  Being  vols.  2  and  j  of  "Ancient  Christian- 
ity." By  Philip  S.  haff,  D.  D.  2  vols.  8vo.  Price  $7  50. 
Also  just  ready.  New  Edition  of  vol,  i,  same  work,  A,  D.  i-jii. 
S3  75- 
The  New  York  "  Tribune"  says : — 

"  In  the  union  of  profound  and  exact  learning  with  the  gift  of 
popular  representation.  Dr.  Schaff  is  almost  without  a  rival  among 
modern  ecclesiastical  historians.  In  his  hands  the  history  of  the 
Church  is  not  a  barren  record  of  forgotten  names  and  obsolete 
dogmas,  but  an  attractive  picture  of  the  intellectual  and  moral 
life  of  successive  ages. 

Copies  sent  bg  mail,  postage  paid,  on  receipt  of  price 


(I.  Elements  of  Logic. 

By  Professor  Henry  N.  Day,  author  of  "Art  of  Rhetoric." 

Price  $1  50, 
Comprising  the  Doctrine  of  the  Laws  and  Products  of  Thought 
and   the   Doctrine  of  Method,  together  with   a   Logical   Praxis, 
designed  for  Classes  and  Private  Study. 

We  have  also  lately  issued  tlie  following  Im- 
portant Works : 
The  Constitutional  Convention,    its  History,  Powers, 

and  Modes  of  Proceeding,  etc.  By  JOHN  A.  Jameson,  Judge 
of  the  Superior  Court  of  Chicago,  Illinois,  i  vol.  8vo.  Cloth, 
$4  50  ;  law  sheep,  $6. 

Lange  on  Acts.  Being  the  third  volume  issued  of  Lange's 
Commentary  on  the  Bible,     i  vol.  royal  8vo.    $5. 

Guyot's  Common  School  Geography,   i  ^^oi.  4to,$i  80. 

Guyot's  Primary  Geography,    i  vol-  4to,  90  cts. 

Tenney's  (Sanborn  and  Abby  Amy)  Natural  His- 
tory of  Animals.  For  Parents,  Teachers,  and  Pupils.  De- 
signed to  accompany  Tenney's  Natural  History  Tablets.    $2. 

Randolph's  (A.  D.  F.)  Hopefully  Waiting,  and  other 

verses,     i  vol.  i6mo.    $1  50. 


Jfust  Heady,  Neiv  Editions,  at  Meduced  Prices  : 

Fisher's  (Rev.  Geo.  P.)  Essays  on  the  Supernatural 

Origin  of  Christianity.     $2  50. 

Hon.  Geo.  P.  Marsh's  Works.    3  vols  8vo.   $j  each. 
I.  Lectures  on  the  English  Language. 
a.  Origin  and  History  of  the  English  Language. 
3.  Man  and  Nature;  or.  Physical  Geography,  as  Modi- 
fied By  Human  Action. 

Woolsey's  (Pres't  D.  D.)  Introduction  to  the  Study 

of  International   Law.     Third   edition,  revised  and   enlarged. 
$250. 

Maine's  (Henry  S.)  Ancient  Law;  its  Connection  with 

the  Early  History  of  Society,  and  its  Relation  to  Modern  Ideas. 
I  vol.  crown  8vo.     $3. 

Perry's  (Prof.  A.  L.)  Elements  of  Political  Econo- 
my. By  Arthur  Latham  Perry.  Revised  and  enlarged. 
I  vol.     $2  50. 

Copies  sent  by  mail,  postage  paid,  on  receipt  of  price. 


< 


